| 1443.090 |
1443 |
Common Pleas |
Entry in the nature of an assize |
D' Entre |
| Mich. |
22 |
Hen. 6 |
31 |
16b-17b |
Aysshton, Nicholas Sjt Asht' (for Ds)
Bingham, Richard Sjt (for P)
Aysshton, Nicholas Sjt Ashton
Bingham, Richard Sjt
Aysshton, Nicholas Sjt Ashton
Newton, Richard CJCP
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Newton, Richard CJCP Neut.
Pole, Ralph Sjt (for P)
Ayscough, William JCP Ascue
Portyngton, John JCP
Newton, Richard CJCP 17
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Ayscough, William JCP Ascue
Portyngton, John JCP
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Ayscough, William JCP Ascue
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Aysshton, Nicholas Sjt Ashton
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Bingham, Richard Sjt
Newton, Richard CJCP
the Court
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Paston, William JCP
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Paston, William JCP
all the Court
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Pole, Ralph Sjt
Bingham, Richard Sjt
Newton, Richard CJCP
Brown, Thomas, Clerk of CP
Bingham, Richard Sjt |
Edward |
John |
|
|
|
Westminster, Laurence of, person or place?
Elynour or Elinour, tenant
Henry
Katherine, daughter of Henry
Isabel or J., daughter of Henry
Elizabeth, daughter of Katherine & wife of defendant George P. |
Laurence of Westminster, manor of |
|
Fitzherbert Briefe 97 (not 95, not Travers), Mayntenaunce de briefe 25
Brooke Maintenance de brefe 11, Assise 77, Parnor 8, Travers per sans ceo 295 & 97 (not in Fitzherbert), Issues joynes 59, Generall issue 17 (not in margin), Travers per sans ceo 97 (not in margin) |
34 Hen. 6, fol. 16, Brooke Maintenance de brefe 2, cited in margin |
the statute = 4 Hen. 4 (1402), ch. 7 or 1 Ric. 2 (1377), ch. 9 (against pernors of profits) |
| John Edward porta brief d' Entre en nature d' Assise envers G.P. & J.K. & demande envers eux le manor de |
64 |
Defendants pleaded as to the manor that another was tenant, and as to the 20 acres that the land descended to two daughters whose heirs were one defendant and the wife of the other defendant.
Plaintiff replied by maintaining his writ.
Defendants pleaded that one defendant and the wife of the other defendant were parceners.
Some argument about the pleading.
Adjourned to Pasch. (1444?).
Further argument about whether plaintiff's reply was proper.
Plaintiff (by another counsel) passed over and replied that tenants (defendants) held as the writ supposed, denying that they held in parcenery with the one defendant's wife.
Ayscough JCP and Portyngton JCP said that plaintiff must answer the other defendant who pleaded that he had nothing except in right of his wife.
Plaintiff passed over and replied that he had seisin until disseised by defendants, who enfeoffed persons unknown to defraud plaintiff and took all the profits.
Ayscough JCP said that plaintiff must add that he sued within the year after he was disseised.
At another day, plaintiff's reply was held good enough, and as to defendant husband's plea plaintiff maintained his writ, denying that defendant's wife had anything.
Defendants rejoined by tracing descent to one defendant and the wife of the other, denying that defendants took any profits from the land at the time the writ was purchased.
Plaintiff (by both counsel), rebutted that defendants' plea amounted only to a general denial of taking profits.
By advice of the Court, defendants (?) had the plea.
Plaintiff argued that the issue was not well taken and defendants should have denied taking the profits of the soil as plaintiff (demandant) supposed.
Paston JCP and all the Court said that the issue was well taken without this denial.
Plaintiff rebutted that defendants took the profits of the soil in another manner.
The Court said that this was no issue if plaintif did not show how defendants took the profits specially.
Plaintiff waived his reply and replied that defendants held the land as the writ supposed, denying that defendant's wife had anything.
Further argument about the pleading.
A clerk said that the same entry would be made when parcenry is pleaded and when joint tenancy is pleaded.
Plaintiff (by his first counsel) too the issue against both defendants.
Issue was joined (sic ad Patriam). |
Newton CJCP: Cest rent est a eux le profit del' soil
Sjt Pole (for P): n' en fait n' en Ley |
demand for a manor and 20 acres of land
Sjt Bingham and after an ajournment Sjt Pole pleaded for plaintiff, then both pleaded together for plaintiff
Ayscough JCP and Portyngton JCP argued for plaintiff's position
Newton CJCP: the husband cannot say that he held in coparcenery with his wife: and if there are two parceners, even if one wanted to plead a false plea, this would not foreclose (concludera) his companion from pleading a good plea as to all |
|
|
Fitzherbert Briefe 97 identified the defendants as G.A. and J. Poling |
|
Nature
Assize
Demand
Manor
Acre
Nontenure
Showing
Seisin
Death
Descent
Daughter
Heir
Right
Wife
Relative (cosin)
Right of His Wife
Judgment
Common Ancestor
Ancestor
Belonging
Life
Parcenry
Averment
Plea
Pleading
Abatement
Otherwise
Form
Sufficiency
Bar
General Bar
Adjournment
Term
Maintenance of Writ
Supposition
In By Descent
In By Disseisin
Disseisin
Contrary
Contradiction
Several Plea
Together
Matter
Joint Tenancy
Companion
Joint Plea
Joinder in Plea
Husband
Coparcenry
Parcener
Falsehood
False Plea
Foreclosure (concluder)
Good Plea
Passing
Denial
Sans Ceo
Answer
Relevance
Irrelevance
Possession
Name
Person
Unknown Person
Knowledge
Intent
Understanding
Fraud
Profit
Taking Profits
Pernor of Profits
Surmise
Action
Year
Statute
General Statute
Lease
Term of LIfe
Demesne
Fee
Fealty
Rent
Force
Reversion
Own Right
Distraint
Purchase of Writ
Amount
Showing
Pernor of Rent
Soil
Profts of Soil
Advice
Issue
In Fact
In Law
General Taking
Special Taking
Waiver
Special Maintenance
General Nontenure
Replication
Course
Entry
Jury (Patriam) |
|
