Standford against Cooper
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 79 E.R. 690
King's Bench Division
case 2. standford against cooper, Hilary Term, 3 Car. 1. Roll 2674. The essoign day is, in law, the first day of the term ; and all legal acts shall relate to that day, and not the quarto die post. Hutton, 72. Yelv. 35. 1 Bulst. 32. Jeiik. 250. Hetley, 95. 1 Bl. Rep. 227. 496. Cruise on Fines, 54. Gilb. Uses, 79. 2 Term Rep. 16. 3 Term Rep. 185. Scire facias upon a judgment in debt, in Hilary term, 22 Jac. 1. against one Bill. The defendant, being returned terre-tenant, pleads a statute acknowledged by the said Bill, 22 January, 22 Jac. 1. and an extent by virtue of the said statute. The question was, if this judgment shall relate to the first day of Hilary term, which was the twentieth of January, being the essoign day, or only to the twenty-third of January, which was quarto die post 1 for if it related to the twentieth of January, being the essoign day, it is precedent to the statute. And all the Court agreed, that the judgment shall have relation to the essoign day; for in law it is the first day of the term, and all legal acts have relation thereunto, and the quarto die post is the day of grace, till when for divers purposes no party shall be prejudiced for not appearing; but as to common intendment, it hath relation to the essoign day: wherefore, being upon a demurrer, it was adjudged accordingly for the plaintiff. Dyer, 200. and 361. 34 Hen. 6. 20. 22 Hen. 6, 7. (a) 21 Hen. 7. pi. 7. 19 Hen. 6. pi. 4. and 45. 7 Hen. 6. pi. 2.
English Reports Citation: 79 E.R. 691
IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
CRO. CAS. 103. HILARY TERM, 3 CAR. 1. IN C. B. AND C. S. 691 case 3. bccgot against smyth. In the Exchequer Chamber. An estate limited to husband and wife for life, remainder to the survivor of them in fee, if the husband make a feoffment the contingency is destroyed, and the wife's entry upon his death will not support the fee.-Co. Lit. 46. b. 378. 2 Roll. Abr. 796. 1 Co. 134. b. E. 697. 738. 2 Lev. 39. Com. Rep. 46. 3 Mod. 309. 1 Vent. 189. Fearne's Essay on Contingent Remainders, 4th edit. 7. 434. 457. L. Ray. 314. says, this case is nice to an instant, for the right ought to be precedent to support the contingency ; and therefore, because the right arose to the wife eo instante that the contingency happened, the remainder was adjudged to be destroyed; and the case has always been held for law. Sec also Com. Rep. 46. Fearne, 4th...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v Chichester
...Dow v. Magill 1 H. & Bro. 396, n. Robinson v. TongeENR 3 P. Wms. 399. Borough v. WilliamsonUNK 11 Ir. Eq. Rep. 1. Stanford v. CooperENR Cro. Car. 102. Doe v. CreedUNK 5 Bingh. 327; S. C. 2 M. & P. 648. Bragner v. LangmeadENR 7 T. R. 20. Calvert v. TomlinUNK 5 Bingh. 1; S. C. 2 M. & P. 1. Ex......