Difference between revisions of "STAC Crouch"

From Waalt
Line 1: Line 1:
 
''' Crouch, Walter '''
 
''' Crouch, Walter '''
−
*STAC 5/C66/5 - B A - 33 Eliz - Walter Crouch, Edward Gorge et al v William Eaton, Anthony Bissey et al
+
*STAC 5/C66/5 - B A - 33 Eliz - Walter Crouch, Edward Gorge et al v William Eaton, Anthony Bissey et al. See Report [[STAC 5/C66/5r]]
 
*STAC 5/C27/6 - I D - 34 Eliz - Walter Crowche v Anthony Bosey, William Eaton
 
*STAC 5/C27/6 - I D - 34 Eliz - Walter Crowche v Anthony Bosey, William Eaton
 
*STAC 5/C70/29 - B Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - Walter Crowck v Walter Hungerford, Richard Tyderleighe
 
*STAC 5/C70/29 - B Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - Walter Crowck v Walter Hungerford, Richard Tyderleighe
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 
'''Notes, Additions and Corrections:'''  
 
'''Notes, Additions and Corrections:'''  
−
*Account of Walter Crouch v Sir Walter Hungerford et al (forgery, 35 Eliz) in Les reportes del cases in Camera Stellata, 1593 to 1609 from the original ms. of John Hawarde edited by William Paley Baildon Published 1894, p. 21 - 22. In Camera Stelllata, 16 Maij, Eiizab. 35. Walter Crouche, plaintiff. Sir Walter Hungerford and others, defendants. The case was for forging a deed, and [Page 22] the point was the erasure of a word contained in the deed, to wit, [in the sentence] habendum sibi et assignatis suis, he erased assignatis and wrote heredibus. But at the end of the hearing, (for the case was two days in hearing.) Sir Walter Hungerford was acquitted for want of proof; for Crouche could not prove that the forgery was done by Hungerford himself; and so Sir Walter Hungerford was dismissed to the common law. The Lord Keeper cited that [the words] to hold to him and his assigns to his own proper use and to the use of his heirs and assigns were adjudged in Bostons case to be an estate for life, and a fee simple in use.
 
 
*STAC 5/C6/20 - Manor of Wellowe, Somerset.(dk)
 
*STAC 5/C6/20 - Manor of Wellowe, Somerset.(dk)

Revision as of 17:43, 14 April 2018

Crouch, Walter

  • STAC 5/C66/5 - B A - 33 Eliz - Walter Crouch, Edward Gorge et al v William Eaton, Anthony Bissey et al. See Report STAC 5/C66/5r
  • STAC 5/C27/6 - I D - 34 Eliz - Walter Crowche v Anthony Bosey, William Eaton
  • STAC 5/C70/29 - B Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - Walter Crowck v Walter Hungerford, Richard Tyderleighe
  • STAC 5/C56/34 - Rn - 34 Eliz - Walter Crouch et al v Sir Walter Hungerford et al
  • STAC 5/C27/29 - I D - Mich 34/35 Eliz - Walter Crowche v Sir Walter Hungerford
  • STAC 5/C48/29 - D - 35 Eliz - [blank] Crowthe v Walter Hungerford et al
  • STAC 5/C49/21 - I D - 34 Eliz - Walter Crouch et al v Sir Walter Hungerford

Crouch, William

  • STAC 5/C6/20 - B A Rn - 11 Eliz - Somerset - William Crouche v William Butler, Arthur Pickering, Walter Wykes, Edmund Colthurst et al
  • STAC 5/C56/22 - B A - 13 Eliz - Somerset - William Crouch v William Boteler, Henry Chubb et al
  • STAC 5/C12/11 - I D - 14 Eliz - Somerset - William Crowche v William Butler, John Fowey
  • STAC 5/C76/21 - B A C - 14 Eliz - William Crowch v John Batt, William Butler et al
  • STAC 5/C71/1 - B A - 28 Eliz - William Crowch v Charles Merrick

‘’’Bevan Case Index ‘’’

  • Cowch v Batte - STAC 5/C76/21
  • Crouch v Butler - STAC 5/C6/20, STAC 5/C56/22, STAC 5/C12/11
  • Crouch v Eaton - STAC 5/C66/5, STAC 5/C27/6
  • Crouch v Hungerford - STAC 5/C70/29, STAC 5/C27/29, STAC 5/C48/29, STAC 5/C49/21, STAC 5/C56/34
  • Crouch v Merrick - STAC 5/C71/1

Notes, Additions and Corrections:

  • STAC 5/C6/20 - Manor of Wellowe, Somerset.(dk)
Retrieved from "https://waalt.uh.edu/index.php?title=STAC_Crouch&oldid=75521"