Boston University School of Law

Legal History: The Year Books

Record Detail

 
Previous Record Next Record
Image
For an image of this report text from the Vulgate Year Books Reprint, click here.
Seipp Number:
Year
Court
Writ
Marginal Heading
1443.001 1443 Common Pleas Array challenge
Term
Regnal Year
King: Plea Number Folio Number
Hil. 21 Hen. 6 1 22a-22b
Serjeants/ Justices Plaintiff Surname Plaintiff First Name v. Defendent Surname Defendent First Name
Yelverton, William Sjt (for D)
Portyngton, John Sjt (for P)
Portyngton, John Sjt
Newton, Richard CJCP
Portyngton, John Sjt
Brown, Thomas, Clerk of CP
Portyngton, John Sjt
Newton, Richard CJCP
Yelverton, William Sjt
Portyngton, John Sjt
Other Plaintiffs Other Names Places Other Defendents
Abridgements Cross-References Statutes
Fitzherbert Challenge 67
Brooke Challenge 63 
   
Incipit (First Line) Number of Lines
Nota, que un Vicount avoit returne un panel ove x Tales: & ore l' entiere panel ove les x Tales fuit demande, 18
Process and Pleading
The sheriff returned a panel (of additional prospective jurors) with Decem Tales.
The whole panel was demanded, with the Decem Tales, and all the prospective jurors appeared.
Defendant(?) challenged the array because it was made by the undersheriff of persons named (denominated) by plaintiff.
Plaintiff replied that the array was well and duly made.
Two triors were chosen (and sworn, one from the principal panel and one from the Decem Tales panel).
Plaintiff said that the array of the Decem Tales (additional prospective jurors) was affirmed because defendant had only challenged the principal array.
Newton CJCP said that the array of the Decem Tales was not affirmed.
A clerk said that the array of the Decem Tales should be demanded again, so defendant could say what he would to them.
The array of Decem Tales was demanded.
Defendant challenged the array of Decem Tales.
The parties agreed that the same two triors could try this challenge.
Language Notes (Law French)
Abstract Context
Commentary & Paraphrase
Newton CJCP: the better form has been to have said that the inquest (jury) ought not be taken by those arrays, and then the challenge would go to all
Sjt Portyngton (for P): thus will ensue this inconvenience; only two triors ought to try the array (argument that the array of the Decem Tales ought not be tried twice for favour)
Brown, Clerk of CP: it is good to demand those of the Decem Tales again, and to see what the party will say to them
Sjt Portyngton: if they are demanded, and the party does not want to challenge the array, but (wants to challenge) the individual jurors (le polles), and any perhaps are sworn, the others who are sworn to try the principal panel are void; when the entire array of the principal panel and also of the Decem Tales is challenged, the triors ought to be chosen, one from the principal panel and the other from the Tales
Manuscripts Mss Notes Editing Notes Errors
Translations/Editions
Plea Roll Record Year Record Plaintiffs Record Defendants Last Update
0 2004-10-09
Keywords
Note
Sheriff
Return
Panel
Decem Tales
Entirety
Demand
Appearance
Challenge of Juror
Array
Cause
Undersheriff
Denomination
Naming
Trior
Choice
Affirmance
Principal Panel
Form
Better Form
Inquest
Cutting (trenche)
Understanding
Name
Binding
General Challenge
Tales
Ensue
Inconvenience
Favour
Trial
Severalty
Sight
Party
Poll (individual juror)
Swearing
Voidance
Commencement
Agreement
Whole Array
Previous Record Next Record

Return to Search