[001] who has right in the thing has aided himself immediately after the intrusion, on the [002] morrow or within a week, unless hindered by reasonable cause.] The view will sometimes [003] be denied in an action of dower, where a woman claims, in the name of dower, [004] a manor without the appurtenances of which she was specifically endowed, as [005] where she says I claim such a manor as my dower of which A. my former husband [006] endowed me specifically at the church door on the day he married me. Here the [007] tenant will not have the view because the appurtenances are not mentioned, though [008] it would be otherwise if it was claimed with the appurtenances, because she could [009] show appurtenances no part of which the tenant would avow. In an action of dower [010] the view may be denied for uncertainty, as where a woman claims the third part of [011] a manor in the name of dower, with the appurtenances or without them; he will not [012] have the view because she can designate no part in certain. If he claims the view [013] of the whole tenement of which she claims the third part, he will have the view.1 [014] If when the tenant claims the view, the woman answers that she claims nothing [015] except the third part of that of which her husband died seised as of fee, and the [016] tenant holds the whole and the husband's death was recent, the tenant will not have [017] the view since he has the equivalent, that is, of which her husband died seised. The [018] view will also be denied to the woman if the heir sues against her for admeasurement [019] of dower, when she holds the whole of which admeasurement is claimed, for [020] the reason given above, [that is], of which2 her husband recently died seised in such [021] a vill. [This is true unless she holds another tenement in the same vill.] The view [022] does not lie because of uncertainty whether appurtenances are named or not, as [023] where one claims land and says, I claim so much land with the appurtenances, that [024] is, whatever the tenant holds in such a vill beyond the ten librates of land he has [025] of the gift of such a one, because the land sought cannot be specified, unless, an extent [026] having first been made of the ten librates, [it is clear] how much land he holds in such [027] vill. That having been seen and proved, let it then first proceed, [without a view of [028] the rest,] because the extent will be preliminary, as among the pleas which follow the [029] king, before Stephen of Segrave, [the case] of Thomas of Dunholme, citizen of [030] London.3[This may be true unless he claims the view of the whole of which he [031] claims everything beyond the ten.] Several may be tenants successively, no one of [032] whom will have the view if he claims it except the first tenant, for example,4 A. [033] claims against B. so much land with the appurtenances as his right. If B. claims the [034] view he will have it, but no one else, though he vouches one warrantor or ten. Neither [035] the tenant nor the warrantor will have it, as where B. before he claims the view