Difference between revisions of "Cases of Interest"
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
| | | | ||
'''1300:''' | '''1300:''' | ||
− | + | |- | |
'''P1308 A:''' Simon de Parys v. Walter Page (bailiff of Robert Tony) et al. Assault and imprisonment. Simon who had lived in London for more than 30 years was taken on the king's highway at Necton, co. Norfolk, and imprisoned because he was a villein [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no170/aCP40no170fronts/IMG_0094.htm] SJ. Law report and notes of the case in Selden Society vol. 17, pp. 11-13 | '''P1308 A:''' Simon de Parys v. Walter Page (bailiff of Robert Tony) et al. Assault and imprisonment. Simon who had lived in London for more than 30 years was taken on the king's highway at Necton, co. Norfolk, and imprisoned because he was a villein [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no170/aCP40no170fronts/IMG_0094.htm] SJ. Law report and notes of the case in Selden Society vol. 17, pp. 11-13 | ||
Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
'''T1319 A:''' London. King and Robert de Melburn v. John Warde de Hoo. Ripping off of seal from acquittance made in court (on Saturday, 11 Feb. 1318) in which was contained that John had received from Robert all the money owed to him 'racione quarte partis ballive clamatorum hic in banco'. John acknowledged that he was given the acquittance but denied taking it by force (rogando predictum Robertum quod ballivam predictam ei reddere recusavit juxta convencionem predictam sigillum predicti scripti in manu sua tunc existentis a scripto illo abstraxit). Roger de Stowe and John Aleyn, criers, are ordered to summon a jury of attorneys and apprentices. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no230/aCP40no230fronts/IMG_00358.htm] SJ | '''T1319 A:''' London. King and Robert de Melburn v. John Warde de Hoo. Ripping off of seal from acquittance made in court (on Saturday, 11 Feb. 1318) in which was contained that John had received from Robert all the money owed to him 'racione quarte partis ballive clamatorum hic in banco'. John acknowledged that he was given the acquittance but denied taking it by force (rogando predictum Robertum quod ballivam predictam ei reddere recusavit juxta convencionem predictam sigillum predicti scripti in manu sua tunc existentis a scripto illo abstraxit). Roger de Stowe and John Aleyn, criers, are ordered to summon a jury of attorneys and apprentices. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no230/aCP40no230fronts/IMG_00358.htm] SJ | ||
− | |||
| | | | ||
'''1325:''' | '''1325:''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''M1326 A:''' London. King (by Geoffrey de Lenne) v. Roger de Kent and his wife Cecile (and their son Roger). Taking away of the king's goods worth £100 in the custody of the king's tailor Henry of Canterbury in the parish of St Botulph Algate, London, and assaulting the king's servants (John de Haselyngfeld and John de Staunton). Damages 1000 marks. Jury summoned. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no264/aCP40no264fronts/IMG_0228.htm] SJ | ||
'''H1339A:''' Presentment of William Maryoun and others for conspiring to sue appeals in the names of non-existent persons (''numquam fuit in rerum natura''). One instance involved prosecuting an appeal of robbery at the suit of a fictitious person. Another instance involved causing a wife to prosecute an appeal for the death of her fictitious husband. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/E3/KB27no315/bKB27no315dorses/IMG_0255.htm]JR | '''H1339A:''' Presentment of William Maryoun and others for conspiring to sue appeals in the names of non-existent persons (''numquam fuit in rerum natura''). One instance involved prosecuting an appeal of robbery at the suit of a fictitious person. Another instance involved causing a wife to prosecute an appeal for the death of her fictitious husband. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/E3/KB27no315/bKB27no315dorses/IMG_0255.htm]JR | ||
Line 103: | Line 104: | ||
'''H1339B:''': Richard le Walsh mesne process v. Michael Smith and others ''vi et armis'' for killing his camel worth 20 marks. [8]JR | '''H1339B:''': Richard le Walsh mesne process v. Michael Smith and others ''vi et armis'' for killing his camel worth 20 marks. [8]JR | ||
− | + | '''T1342 A:''' Presentment for usury. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/E3/KB27no333/aKB27no333fronts/IMG_0295.htm] rcp | |
− | + | '''M1346 A:''' Related to Humber Ferryman case. Nottinghamshire. Richard son of Gerard de Lanum v. William son of Roger Botild de Lanum. Why, whereas the same William (took Richard with his horse loaded with merchandise into a certain boat at Lanam to be carried over the River Trent), (William with force and arms ejected the horse into the river) ... [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no346/bKB27no346dorses1dto145d/IMG_9758.htm] rcp | |
'''M1348 A:''' Humber Ferryman Case. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no354/aKB27no354mm1toEnd/IMG_6975.htm] | '''M1348 A:''' Humber Ferryman Case. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no354/aKB27no354mm1toEnd/IMG_6975.htm] | ||
Line 150: | Line 151: | ||
*M1357 A: ''' Norfolk. Roger atte Cros v. Thomas Gibbes de Saxlingham. Trespass; breach of close. Plea allowed that a swarm of bees had flown from defendant's land onto plaintiff's and landed on some bark. Defendant took the bark with the swarm of bees. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no389/cKB27no389dorses/IMG_0106.htm] rcp | *M1357 A: ''' Norfolk. Roger atte Cros v. Thomas Gibbes de Saxlingham. Trespass; breach of close. Plea allowed that a swarm of bees had flown from defendant's land onto plaintiff's and landed on some bark. Defendant took the bark with the swarm of bees. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no389/cKB27no389dorses/IMG_0106.htm] rcp | ||
− | + | '''H1358 A: ''' Warwickshire. Indenture between William de Shareshull knight and William de Peyto. The indenture attests that, whereas Shareshull was held by an obligatory writing to pay Peyto 100 marks, Peyto granted that if Shareshull paid 40 marks within two years, the obligation would be null and void. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no390/bKB27no390dorses/IMG_0750.htm]. Substance of a penal bond involving Shareshull. rcp | |
− | + | '''E1358 A:''' Hertfordshire. Nicholas Blithewyne jr late constable of Stortford castle and warden of the prison there v. Robet Luffe. Why, whereas plaintiff hired defendant to guard, defendant allowed three clerical convicted felons delivered to the bishop of London to escape. No vi et armis. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no391/aKB27no391fronts/IMG_0951.htm] rcp | |
− | + | '''M1359 A:''' Middlesex. Stephen de Holbourn (qui tam) v. John de Drayton brewer. Death threats by him and others against Stephen for prosecuting a case under the Statute of Laborers. [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E3/KB27no397/bKB27no397dorses/IMG_4382.htm] rcp | |
|- | |- | ||
Revision as of 17:39, 12 April 2016
This page will be segmented when it gets too long. Add information by clicking on "edit" above. Items should begin with term (if available) and year, together with a letter to allow for distinguishing subsequent documents in the same year and term, and the designation should be in bold, as in this example: H1285 A:. Text thereafter should indicate what the document concerns. The link to the image of the document should be a copied and pasted full web address (http:// . . .) surrounded by single brackets ( [ ] ), as in this example: [http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT1/E1/KB27no171/bKB27no171dorses/IMG_3719.htm]. Leave a line between entries. The 25-year segments begin with a vertical bar (|) and end with a vertical bar minus (|-). Avoid other more complex codes. If you want to append a translation, provide a completely unique address surrounded by double brackets, as in this example: [[Dartmouth Docs H1275 A Tr]]. Such an address indicates sector and year, the A indicates it is the first document entered for that year and term, the Tr indicates it is a translation. That will constitute a unique address. This will appear in the saved document as a red hyperlink, indicating that it has no content as yet. Clicking on this red hyperlink will open the new document in edit mode. DO NOT attempt to re-order documents within a term to achieve a perfect chronology, since it will invalidate other references to re-named documents. A document written in Notepad will copy into the site without any complicating code. Avoid more complicated coding. Check your entry before saving by clicking on "show preview" below; before leaving the document, remember to save the page.
|
1225: |
1250: |
1275: |
1300: |
1325: M1326 A: London. King (by Geoffrey de Lenne) v. Roger de Kent and his wife Cecile (and their son Roger). Taking away of the king's goods worth £100 in the custody of the king's tailor Henry of Canterbury in the parish of St Botulph Algate, London, and assaulting the king's servants (John de Haselyngfeld and John de Staunton). Damages 1000 marks. Jury summoned. [42] SJ H1339A: Presentment of William Maryoun and others for conspiring to sue appeals in the names of non-existent persons (numquam fuit in rerum natura). One instance involved prosecuting an appeal of robbery at the suit of a fictitious person. Another instance involved causing a wife to prosecute an appeal for the death of her fictitious husband. [43]JR H1339B:: Richard le Walsh mesne process v. Michael Smith and others vi et armis for killing his camel worth 20 marks. [8]JR T1342 A: Presentment for usury. [44] rcp M1346 A: Related to Humber Ferryman case. Nottinghamshire. Richard son of Gerard de Lanum v. William son of Roger Botild de Lanum. Why, whereas the same William (took Richard with his horse loaded with merchandise into a certain boat at Lanam to be carried over the River Trent), (William with force and arms ejected the horse into the river) ... [45] rcp M1348 A: Humber Ferryman Case. [46] M1348 B: Yorkshire. Prior of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem v. Ralph de Bulmer chivaler and Alice his wife, and Adam de Horthewyke. Novel disseisin. A common law feoffment by a tenant in villeinage constitutes a disseisin to the lord committed even by the feoffees and all who were present at the feoffment. [47] M1348 C: Rutland. John son of Hasculph de Whitewell (qui tam) v. Robert Fraunceys. The king ordered execution of the judgment lately rendered in the county court in the case by writ (John son of Hasculph v. Simon de Shepay cleric, Simon de Bekyngam cleric, Robert Fraunceys, Hugh de Medebourne, and Robert de Beverley executors of Robert de Wodehouse cleric) for 180 p.s. The sheriff arrested goods and chattels to that value at Keton and Exton, but Fraunceys took those goods. [48] rcp M1349 A: London. habeas corpus cum causa. [49] |
1350: M1350 A: Lincolnshire. Very early scienter (first?). Robert de Ormesby and Joan his wife v. Alan prior of Ormesby. [50] rcp H1351 A: London. Habeas corpus cum causa. [51] H1352 A: London. Habeas corpus cum causa. [52] M1353 A: Surrey. Presentment jury retails grant of fee simple subject to a condition subsequent; enforcement of pregogative wardship. [53] rcp M1353 B: Middlesex. Confession of trespass brought by bill of Middlesex by Thomas de Thorp, clerk, against Miles de Stodham, who is committed to the Marshalsea prison [54] SJ H1354 A:Hunt'. Seal ripped off writ of right in open court [55]SJ P1354 A: Surrey. Approver told to withdraw his appeal and given help to escape by officials, but he fell to his death while trying to escape and the coroner recorded a natural death [56] SJ P1354 B: Norffolk. Tearful pleas (ex lacrimosa querimonia) were made by many lawful men before the king 'in presenci consilio suo' in Westminster in regard to Richard de la Illeye, who had provided surety of good behaviour but had subsequently broken the peace frequently [57] SJ T1354 A: Kent. Trespass vi et armis. Richard Stone of Dartford v. William de Hatfeld of London goldsmith Alleged taking vi et armis of gold and silver buckles and rings. Plea that he is a goldsmith and the buckles and rings were weak and delivered to him to repair according to his art, with special traverse he vi et armis took any buckles or rings, so that he asked judgment if he could be sued as an artisan for goods thus delivered. Without any recorded ruling, plaintiff and defendant joined issue on the taking of buckles and rings vi et armis and contra pacem. [58] rcp T1354 B: Lincoln. Appeal brought by widow of victim is found insufficient because she initiated it before the coroner rather than the sheriff [59] SJ T1354 C: London. Appeal of mayhem brought by Robert de Yakesle v Thomas de Ribbeford who asked the judges to decide by inspecting the alleged wounds whether it is mayhem or not. The justices summon two London doctors to do this for them. [60] SJ M 1354 A: Sussex. John de Raynford v. Robert de Grykedene et al, felonious mayhem, £551 in damages awarded [61] SJ H1355 A: Wiltshire. Trespass (although tongue was cut off during the assault). John Talbot v. Walter brother of William son of Walter Attemulle de Tronbrigge et al. [62] SJ H1355 B: London. Henry de Lede and Emma, his wife v. William Omery. Felonious mayhem of Emma. Writ quashed because plaintiffs had brought a writ for the same mayhem in an earlier term and had abandoned that plea [63] SJ
H1358 A: Warwickshire. Indenture between William de Shareshull knight and William de Peyto. The indenture attests that, whereas Shareshull was held by an obligatory writing to pay Peyto 100 marks, Peyto granted that if Shareshull paid 40 marks within two years, the obligation would be null and void. [65]. Substance of a penal bond involving Shareshull. rcp E1358 A: Hertfordshire. Nicholas Blithewyne jr late constable of Stortford castle and warden of the prison there v. Robet Luffe. Why, whereas plaintiff hired defendant to guard, defendant allowed three clerical convicted felons delivered to the bishop of London to escape. No vi et armis. [66] rcp M1359 A: Middlesex. Stephen de Holbourn (qui tam) v. John de Drayton brewer. Death threats by him and others against Stephen for prosecuting a case under the Statute of Laborers. [67] rcp |
1360
|
1375: |
1377:
|
1379: |
1394:
|
1400: |
'1413:
|
1415:
|
1425: |
1464
|
1450 |
1475: |
1476:
|
1500:
|
1525:
|
1550: |
1575: |
1600: |
1625: |
1650: |
1675: |