Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 3, Page 120

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 3, Page 120

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] by the act of their people. If the plaintiff recovers against them, and if the lord,
[002] when he returns, then avows the act of his people, he incurs the penalty for disseisin
[003] with them; if it seems expedient, let him sue to convict the jurors.¹ If before they return
[004] and avow the disseisin the lords die and their heirs succeed, the heirs may still
[005] avow or disavow the act of their people before the taking of the assise, because their
[006] deed was not avowed by the ancestor; if it had been, he [the ancestor] would be the
[007] first and principal disseisor and liable both to the penalty and to restitution, and the
[008] disseisin thus would not pass to the heirs as regards the penalty, though it would with
[009] respect to restitution, by writ of entry. But since he did not avow, the avowal of the
[010] disseisin thus would not pass to the heirs, [as regards the penalty, though it would
[011] with respect to restitution, by writ of entry.] But since he did not avow, the avowal of
[012] the disseisin thus passes to the heirs, and² thus let them avow the deed or disavow it,
[013] and be liable or not for the injuria.³ What was said of a lord and his heir is true of a
[014] deceased abbot or prior and their successors. If the abbots and priors are alive and,
[015] before they avow, have been deposed or translated to other dignities, what is said.
[016] above of heirs will apply to their successors.⁴ If they have avowed before the deposition
[017] or change of dignity, they are liable after the deposition or change, whether
[018] the writ is impetrated against them in their own name or in the name of their dignity
[019] or in both,⁵ so that if the writ was impetrated against them before the deposition or
[020] change the assise will proceed under the name of ‘abbot’ or ‘prior,’ even after the
[021] deposition or translation. But if it was impetrated after the deposition or change,
[022] [though] when they avow they are liable by reason of ratification, they are to be
[023] sued by a writ of novel disseisin not under the name of ‘abbot’ or ‘prior’ but by this
[024] writ: ‘Such a one has complained to us that such a monk (or ‘canon’) once abbot of
[025] such a place, has wrongfully etc.’ And so if he has been translated, that is, ‘such a
[026] bishop etc.’⁶

If one enters immediately after a disseisin.

[028] If one enters immediately after a disseisin, while the misdeed is fresh, that he is liable
[029] is not remarkable, since the thing itself is tainted because of the disseisin.⁷ For he
[030] knows or ought to know what and⁸ what kind of thing it is into which he enters,
[031] whether it is tainted by disseisin, just as he who buys ought to know whether
[032] the thing is free or bound by the imposition or the constitution of a servitude,⁹ [or]
[033] whether the thing is burdened or not, [or] litigious by diligent

Notes

1. Supra 45

2. ‘et’

3. Supra 45, 83

4. Supra 83

5. ‘sive impetratum . . . utroque,’ from lines 16-18

6. Supra 83

7. ‘vitiosa possessio’: D. 41.2.13.13; 41.2.53 etc.

8. ‘et’

9. Supra ii, 147-8