Thompson and Leach
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Date | 01 January 1724 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 90 E.R. 577
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
thompson and leach. Post. Deed by an ideot is void. Copyhold lands were settled upon an ideot for life, remainder to his first son in tail, remainder to the right heirs of the ideot. The ideot, before the birth of his son, makes a surrender to the use of the defendant and his heirs. Afterwards a son was born, under whom the plaintiff' claims, Carthue pro quer'. This surrender is void, as to the son and heir of the ideot, who is privy in blood as well as in estate ; the authorities in the case of infancy will hold in this case of ideocy, only with this difference, that an infant may avoid his own acts in some cases, but so cannot an ideot. There is a diversity between a feoffment made by an infant and meer matters in pais, which work no discontinuance, for which he cited Perk. Grants 13. 1 Cro. 303, in Blundel and Baugh's ease, 8 Co. 43, in Whittingham's case, 4 Co. 125 a. in Beverley's case. This deed of surrender executed by the ideot is void ad initio, as to the lessor of the plaintiff. 34 Ass. 10. 5 Co. , Russel's case, if the release of an ideot or infant be void, so shall his surrender. Perk. 13. An infant grants a rent-charge, if the grantee distrains, the grantor may bring trespass. 2 In at. 673. Bargain and sale by an infant is void. 1 Cro. 502, Lloyd and Gregory is in point, Poph. 38, 39, Bullock and Dibler. In the principal case of Darcy and Jackson, Palm 254, it was held, that privies in estate might take advantage of infancy, &c. and there Doderidge deny'd the opinion of my Lord Coke, 8 Co. 43. Sir Barth. Shower pro defendente. Tho' the reversion be to the right heirs of the ideot, yet here, if the lessor of the plaintiff take any thing, it must be an estate-tail, which he cannot have, because the defendant's estate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leach and Others against Thompson
...grant without any other act divests the estate out of the surrenderor, and vests it in the surrenderee.-S. C. Garth. 211, 250, 435, S. C. Comb. 438, 468. S. C. Holt, 357, 623, 665. S. C. 3 Mod. 301. S. C. 2 Salk. 427, 565, 618, 675. S. C. 3 Salk. 300. S. C. 2 Vent. 198. Error in the King's ......
-
Thompson v Leach
...[313] thompson vers. leach. Intr. Hil. 7 Will. 3, Rot. 733. S. C. Salk. 427, 576. Carth. 436. 12 Mod. 173. 3 Salk. 301. Holt. 357, 623. Comb. 438, 468. Comb. 45. 1 Freem. 508. Eq. Abr. Ideots, B. pi. 3, ed. 1756, p. 278. By the destruction of all the preceding freehold estates, and of the p......
-
Thompson v Leach. in B. R
...(with note).] Whether the surrender of a person that was non compos mentis is absolutely void. 1 Ld. Raym. 313, S. C. Carth. 435, S. C. Comb. 438, 468, S. C. Holt 357, 623, S. Q 3 Lev. 284, S. C. 3 Mod. 301, S. C. 12 Mod. 173, S. C. 2 Vent. 198, S. C. Salk. 427, 576, 675, S. C. Show. P. C. ......
-
Thomson against Leach
...Thomson against Leach case 300. thomson against leach. Surrender by a lunatic is absolutely void.-S. C. Carth. 211, 250, 435. S. C. Comb. 438, 468. S. C. Corny. 45. S. C. 1 Eq. Abr. 278. S. C. Holt, 357, 623, 665. S. C. 3 Lev. 284. S. C. 3 Mod. 296, 301. S. C. 1 Ld. Ray. 313. S. C. 2 Salk. ......