| 1372.111 |
1372 |
|
Quare impedit |
Quare impedit
Estoppel |
Fulthorp, Roger de Sjt (for P)
Belknap, Robert Sjt (for D)
Fulthorpe, Roger de Sjt |
|
|
|
|
Fitzherbert Estoppel 206
Brooke Estopell (not Estoppel) 46
Statham Estoppell 4 (not Hil.) |
|
|
| Quare impedit devers John Fitz-warrein & auter, & fist title pur aver le presentment, per cause que la dit |
16 |
| Quare impedit against John Fitz-warrein and another, and he made title to have the presentment, for the reason that the said Fitz-warrein had granted him the first vacancy of the said church by the deed that he put forward. The defendant said that he was within age at the time of the making of the deed, not acknowledging the date of the deed. The plaintiff said that the defendant's lands and tenements were in the king's hand, and he came into the Chancery on a certain day and year, and proved there that he was of full age, and had livery of his lands and tenements out etc., after which time this deed was made etc., that is, on a certain day in a certain year, the making of which deed, the plaintiff was ready to aver, was after the proof of the defendant's age, and the plaintiff demanded judgment if the defendant would be received to that general averment to say within age, contrary to this special matter. The defendant said that he had tendered an issue, which the plaintifff refused, and he demanded judgment. The plaintiff prayed leave to imparl, and the next day he put forward a record on this, and nevertheless he was driven to take the issue, within age at the time, and this because he could not take issue on the date of the deed, and he had a writ of Venire facias for twelve on the octave of St. Martin. The next day the plaintiff came and said that there was one named in the writ who had not answered and was not demanded, and he prayed distraint against him returnable on the octave of Hillary, and he could not have it, because it would be in delay of the defendant, and he did not see reason that he would be delayed by the deed of another, because it was the fault of the plaintiff that he had not been demanded, so he could not have distraint returnable except on the same day the Venire facias was returnable. |
|
