Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 3, Page 79

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 3, Page 79

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] the writ is dated there was some reason for impetrating. For that reason the date
[002] must be examined to see if it has been deleted or changed in any way.¹ And that an
[003] impetration is without effect and is void unless a true cause for impetrating exists,²
[004] and that the writ ought to fall, is proved in [the roll of] the eyre of William of Ralegh
[005] in the county of Warwick, an assise of novel disseisin [beginning] ‘if Gerard³ son of
[006] William.’⁴ And so if he has withdrawn himself from a like writ and from the assise;
[007] not if because of falsity and error.⁵ Also if he first began to sue on another's seisin
[008] rather than on his own, [as] by an assise of mortdancestor, a writ of entry, a writ of
[009] right, or by some other, no matter which, the order in which writs are to be sued not
[010] being observed.⁶ Also if he has impetrated a similar writ, before the same judge or
[011] another, from the prosecution of which he did not withdraw by license or in some
[012] other [proper] way.⁷ Also if it has been impetrated contrary to the common law, so
[013] that several plaintiffs are included in one writ where there are different complaints,
[014] persons and disseisins, unless where there is a single right and several persons [are] as
[015] a single heir, as those who are co-heirs and parceners and hold in common.

That error is manifold.

[017] ⁸[Error destroys the writ, but not the judgment or the assise. [The writ falls]⁹ [as
[018] where he errs by impetrating against one who possesses in another's name, not in his
[019] own, as a farmer, a prior, or a canon removable, as was said above and will be explained
[020] below; nor does an exception or a plaint lie for such persons.]¹⁰ because of error
[021] in the name, as where for ‘Henry’ the name ‘William’ is put in the writ, or conversely.
[022] Similarly, if there is error in the surname, as where it reads ‘Hubert Robert’ where
[023] ‘Hubert Walter’ ought to be said. And so if there is error in the name of the vill
[024] whence one has his origin, as where for ‘of London’ he names [him] in the writ ‘of
[025] Winchester.’ Also if there is error in a syllable, as where he names another ‘Henry of
[026] Brothton’ where he ought to name him¹¹ ‘of Bratton.’ And so of a letter, by naming
[027] him ‘Henry of Bretton’ when he ought to name him ‘Henry of Bratton.’ All these
[028] may be proved by examples. The result will still be the same if the person is clear and
[029] [the name and] surname correct, but there is error in the name of his dignity, as where
[030] it is said in a writ, ‘Henry of Bratton, precentor, has complained to us’ when he is a
[031] dean, and so the writ falls. And so if there is error

Notes

1. Om: ‘et per hoc . . . data’

2. Supra 38, 66, infra 126, 176; Drogheda, 327, 329

3. ‘Gerardus’

4. Not in B.N.B.

5. Supra 37, 65

6. Supra ii, 297, 319

7. Supra 65

8. A passage supplementing and illustrating the next two sections

9. Om: ‘Error . . . querentis’

10. Belongs infra 80, n. 3; om: ‘Item . . . assisa’

11. ‘nominare,’ all MSS