Boston University School of Law

Legal History: The Year Books

Record Detail

 
Previous Record Next Record
Seipp Number:
Year
Court
Writ
Marginal Heading
1269.001ss 1269 Northumberland Eyre Naifty, False Judgment (Recordari) recordum de falso judicio nativitatis
de nativo
Term
Regnal Year
King: Plea Number Folio Number
0 Hen. 3 Northumberland 1 122 SS 6-7
Serjeants/ Justices Plaintiff Surname Plaintiff First Name v. Defendent Surname Defendent First Name
Berrington Henry (John, J.) of
Other Plaintiffs Other Names Places Other Defendents
N., sheriff of
Henry, father of plaintiff Henry
Abridgements Cross-References Statutes
     
Incipit (First Line) Number of Lines
Preceptum est vicecomiti N. quod, acceptis secum, etc., in pleno comitatu etc., ut patet in registro. Et 12
Process and Pleading

Language Notes (Law French)
Abstract Context
Commentary & Paraphrase
plaintiff claimed defendant as plaintiff's villein and fugitive
tallages and other villein services
plaintiff produced as suit a daughter of defendant's uncle and a daughter of defendant's aunt, who acknowledged themselves to be plaintiff's villeins
defendant claimed that plaintiff had manumitted (manumisit) defendant (manumisscione) (version II); defendant got a writ for proving his freedom (de libertate sua probanda); it ws adjudged by the whole county (court) that plaintiff should recover defendant as his villein and fugitive with all his chattels and all his issue; it was adjudged (by the Justices) that the county court had made a false judgment and that defendant was to be reinstated in the same status he had at the time the judgment was pronounced and the whole county court is to be amerced and defendant is to have back his chattels
The record was previously printed in Three Early Assize Rolls for the County of Northumberland, ed. William Page (Surtees Society, vol. 88 (1891), pp. 195-197.
Brand: An action of False judgment was brought to challenge a judgment given in favour of the claimant in an action of naifty in the Northumberland county court in 1263. The court reversed the judgment on multiple grounds: the apparent failure of the original count to specify the name of the defendant's grandfather (of whose villein services the plaintiff claimed his father had been seised); the court's admission as the lord's proof of kin the son of an uncle and the son of an aunt without specifying (or recording) their names or whether they were paternal or maternal kin; and usurpation of the right to try the question of the defendant's freedom when the defendant had pleaded a manumission by the plaintiff and obtained a writ de libertate probanda before the case was heard.
(false judgment)
Manuscripts Mss Notes Editing Notes Errors
CUL MS Dd. 7.14, fol. 399v
CUL MS Dd. 7.14, fol. 398v
version II had 18 lines
Translations/Editions
Paul A. Brand, The Earliest English Law Reports, vol. 3, 122 SS 6-8 (London 2005) (69 N' h' land. 1)
Plea Roll Record Year Record Plaintiffs Record Defendants Last Update
JUST 1/643, m. 8d 0 2008-06-29
Keywords
Previous Record Next Record

Return to Search