HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0627 and id is 1 raw text is: REP. TEMP. FINCH, 330.
The Court being satisfied, that the Austins had Notice of the Plaintiffs Title before
the Entry was made for Non-payment of Rent, and before the new Lease granted to
Smith, decreed that the original Lease granted to Houghton for Life. and 21 Years
after, be revived during that Term, for the Benefit of the Plaintiffs Chelsam and his
Wife, as if it had never been forfeited ; and that the Austins execute a new Lease to
the Plaintiffs accordingly, and of the same Date, Covenants and Rent the same, to be
subject to all prior Estates which are to remain, and be in the same Condition as before
the Forfeiture or Surrender of the old Lease.
[330] That the new Lease made by Katharine Austin to Smith, shall be cancelled.
and he to account for all the Rent ever since he hath been in Possession under that
Lease ; but that he shall enjoy so much of the Premisses as were granted by Houghton,
to secure the Payment of £8 Annuity to Reddis and Staines, before the Annuity of
£30 granted to the Plaintiffs, &c.
HENRY FLAVELL, Plaintiff ; MARTHA BALL, Defendant. [1677.]
Feme Covert took a Bond in the Name of her Servant, but in Trust for herself ; her
Husband died, and the Obligor paid the Money to his Administrator.-Bill ordered
to be amended, and to make proper Parties.
The Plaintiff Flavell being possessed of the House and Lands in the Bill, by Virtue
of a Lease for his own Life, made to him by James Earl of Sussex, treated with the
Countess to put in his Wife's Life; for which he was to give £100, which Money the
Earl gave the Countess, and she accepted a Bond for Payment thereof; but being a
Feme Covert, she could not take it in her own Name; but the Plaintiff gave Bond to
the Defendant Ball, for the Payment of the Money in Trust for the Countess.
Sometime after the Earl died, and the Countess relinquished the Administration
to Francis Lord Brudenell and his Lady, who was the only Sister and Heir of the said
Earl, who thereby became intitled to the Money, and demanded the same, and the
Plaintiff paid it to the Lord Brudenell.
And now the Defendant and the Countess of Sussex both claim an Interest in the
Money; and the Defendant denies that the Bond was made to her in Trust, but it
was for her own Use, and refuseth to redeliver it up.
It appearing by this Case, that the Plaintiff's Equity lay against the Lord Brudenell
and his Lady, to whom the Money was paid, and that they were not made Parties to
the Bill ; whereupon the Court ordered, that the Plaintiff should amend his Bill, and
to make them Parties, and in the mean Time the Injunction should be continued.
[331] FRANCIS COREY, Plaintiff; ThOMAS COREY, Defendant. [1677.]
The Plaintiff relieved against an Extent upon an old dormant Statute.
B. C. the Father of the Plaintiff, about fifty-eight Years past entered into a Statute
of £800 to T. C. the Father of the Defendant, to indemnify him against £400 for which
he stood bound with the said B. C. the Cognisor, who afterwards paid the said Debt;
and the Cognisee was never damnified, nor his Heirs, Executors, &c., by reason thereof
but yet the Defendant bath lately extended the Plaintiff's Lands, &c., against which
he brought this Bill to be relieved.
The Defendant answers, that he believ'd the Statute was given for Money lent,
and as to the Length of Time in not putting it in Execution, he said, that he found
a Writing containing an Agreement, that the Statute should not be executed in the
Life-time of the Cognisor ; and that the Plaintiff sometime since being bound for the
Defendant in borrowing Money, he the Defendant (rebus sic stantibus) did not dare
to demand the Money due on the Statute till he cleared his own Debts.
But the Court ordered the Statute to be vacated, and Satisfaction acknowledged,
and that the Extent sued out, should be set aside; and all Amerciament against the
Sheriffs, for not returning the Extent discharged; and a perpetual Injunction to
stay all Proceedings thereon.
FLAVELL V). BALL](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0627&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)