Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	court_n	defendant_n	plaintiff_n	3,417	5	10.5128	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70357	The judges opinions delivered before His Grace the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, in the cause between John St. Leger, Esq; plaintiff, and John Barret, Esq; defendant Taken by the register of the High Court of Chancery, Saturday the 8th of February, 1678. Present, Lord Chancellor, Lord Chief Justice Booth, Lord Chief Baron, Sir Richard Kennedy, Mr. Justice Johnson, Mr. Justice Jones, Sir Richard Reynell.	Jubbes, John.	1685 (1685)	Wing J1169A; ESTC R217109	6,080	5

The JUDGES Opinions delivered before His Grace the Lord Chancellor of Ireland in the Cause between John St. Leger Esq Plaintiff and John Barrett Esq Defendant Taken by the Register of the High Court of Chancery Saturday the 8th of February 1678. PRESENT Lord Chancellor Lord Chief Justice Booth Lord Chief Baron Sir Richard Kennedy Mr. Justice Johnson Mr. Justice Jones Sir Richard Reynell THE Notes of the 10th of May 1678 Read Lord Chancellor the Notes are short in this for His Grace gave a Reason why this Court may determine points of Law was because the Court may have the Judges present The latter part of the Notes 9th of Decemb. Read Sir Richard Reynell That upon the hearing of this Cause several points fell out that of the Intail and that of the Remitter As to the Intail the Court by Approbation of the parties sent it to be tryed and the Jury said they did not find any Intail and the Court declared the Verdict sufficient and satisfactory So that of the Intail is now out of doors but the Defendant saith Though there were no Intail yet the Intent of the Will is for him and for the Opinion of the Judges upon the Construction of the Will the Judges called together saith There was an Original Equity because the Witnesses in England Several Cases have been put concerning the favourable Construction of Wills for that saith Where Lands are given by a Will the words must carry it the Defendant hath urged the Preamble and Body of the Will the Intail by Reputation Sir William Barrett's Answer That the Testator was consulting Justice and Conscience Pray where was Justice and Conscience to disinherit the Right Heir That of Justice and Conscience may be broken off after the wrangling World but if you carry Justice and Conscience to the Intail conceives that of Justice and Conscience is subservient to the Construction for the Plaintiff as well as for Defendant You must look upon it now as if there were no Intail and if so by the words of the Will it must be as if he had said the Lands for which there is no Intail must go to my Uncle St. Leger It cannot be denied but the greatest part of the Lands came by the Mother and that might raise a doubt in Sir William that the Lands were not Intailed and therefore he saith Those Intailed I give to those not Intailed I give to the Plaintiff doth acknowledge that if he had referred to the Inquisitions the Case would have been stronger as in Mollineux's Case saith It is not left to the Defendant by Name nor what Estate nor what Lands only to the Right Heir saith He hath looked over all the Witnesses on both sides and it seems to him that there are more Witnesses and of better quality on the part of the Plaintiff than on the part of the Defendant The use he makes of this is That there would be great inconvenience to the Subject to allow Construction de horse concludes as to this point that the words of the Will and not the intent ought to govern As to the Inquisitions must look upon as a Collusion or Contrivance for here is an Estate of 1000 l. per Annum and yet the person concerned knows nothing of them Then the Feofment by Andrew was but a Contrivance to draw his Wives Estate to him and enable him to make Intail conceives that neither the Witnesses nor the Inquisitions nor the Answer ought to give the Court ground to dispose of the Lands otherwise than according to the words of the Will As to Sir Moyle Finches Case there the Mannor had been once a Mannor de facto but dissolved by accident so not a-kin to this Case Then for the Case Hob. 32. there was a Wife de facto but here is no Intail de facto If there had been an Intail produced something might have been said As to the Case Anderson 188 there it was I devise all my Lands Intail not adjudged all my Lands that I thought Intailed As to the Case in Stiles that Tythes shall be intended there it was upon a fair Construction In this Case you must fetch all out of Averments you must aver for the Person you must aver for the Estate you must aver for the Land you can have nothing but by Averment That the Defendants Councel would have it strong enough to intercept the Deviser and not strong enough to intercept the Heir for which he sees no reason at all To allow Foreign Constructions would be of great inconvenience for Witnesses may swear one way and Witnesses the other Therefore it is a good Rule of Law that the Law should be certain in such Cases and that it might arise out of the Letter of the Will and for this relies upon the Lord Chenyes Case and the Case of Brett and Rigden in Plowden In this latter Case the Testator told that his Son should have the Land but the Judges said this would not do because Lands must pass by Writing but these words not in Writing will instance one Case more that is 2 Leonard 70. saith That to him it seems very plain that as this Case is the Plaintiff ought to be put into the possession of the Lands and that he ought to have a Decree accordingly according to the prayer of his Bill saith If he be put into possession he must resort again to this Court if the Heir should commence action to prove the Will Mr. Justice Jones premiseth two things First That the Defendant is the person intended and 't is so agreed Next If the Lands be Intailed the Defendant is true and lawful Heir will not speak to the Verdict though he conceives much might be said because he finds he is restrained as to that will speak of what hapned before the Death of Sir William Barrett will speak to the Reputation The Inquisition was taken before the Chief Justice of Munster and it finds the Deed which is to be believed before all Witnesses if there were Ten thousand Witnesses How this Intail has been defeated cannot say as to the Will of Old Andrew no mention there that it was Katherines Estate As to the Inquisition after the death of Sir James no mention the Estate was Katherines and Andrew complained her Joynture was too heavy for his Estate It appears too that Katherine took to her Joynture Then the second Inquisition was taken before Sir P. Percival who very well understood what Intails were There was another Inquisition taken after the death of Sir Andrew will reflect upon none but it was taken before Mr. Mead and it was taken by new men who might not be knowing in the Settlements Now we 'l speak what the intent of a Testator does operate in a Will next as to the Reputation as to the intent It is the thing that in Law is always taken to guide the Will for this Plowden Hill and Cradocks Case 107. the same Book Weldons Case 516. Hob. 75.