Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 4, Page 337

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 4, Page 337

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] Blund and his wife.>¹ But nevertheless he is not bound to answer the demandant
[002] without his parceners, and [If he should answer without them and lose, he would
[003] have no recourse against them with respect to recouping his loss, through contribution;
[004] but he can blame that on himself and his own negligence.] though they
[005] are not named they must be called.² They ought therefore to be summoned by
[006] this writ.

Though they are not named they must be summoned, since the tenant need not answer without them.

[008] ‘The king to the sheriff, greeting. Summon A. and B. by good summoners to be before
[009] our justices etc. to answer to C., together with D., as to so much land with the appurtenances
[010] in such a vill (or ‘in such a county’, or ‘with respect to so much land
[011] with the appurtenances in such other county’) which the same C. in our court etc.
[012] claims as his right against the aforesaid D. and without whom the aforesaid D. does
[013] not wish to answer the same C., since the aforesaid A. and B. are parceners of the
[014] same D. as to the aforesaid land.’ If they come, let them answer with D. if they so
[015] wish; if they do not, let the plea proceed nonetheless. And whether they come or not,
[016] if the tenant loses, they will provide him with escambium according to the fractions
[017] of the inheritance they hold. ³<That parceners who are not named ought to be so
[018] summoned is proved [in the roll] of Michaelmas term in the ninth and the beginning
[019] to the tenth years of king Henry in the counties of York and Lincoln, [the case] of
[020] Adam Tuchet.>⁴

All the demandants must be named, though it may be answered that some are bastards and some villeins and the like; there are several proofs, as below.

[022] If the common inheritance is not divided, all must of necessity be named in the writ,
[023] otherwise it falls completely. If the demandant replicates that all need not be named
[024] for the reasons just mentioned,⁵ because, if they are males, all or some are bastards,
[025] or have died, or if they are women, that of those who are not named some are bastards,
[026] some married to villeins, some are neifs [and] some have betaken themselves to
[027] religion, the writ and the action will be in suspense until

Notes

1. B.N.B., no. 1919 (margin): ‘Nota quod ubi hereditas non est partita inter coheredes et unus implacitetur de aliqua parte quam ipse tenuerit, respondebit sine participibus.’

2. Om: ‘cum tenens . . . teneatur,’ redundant

3. Supra i, 412

4. C.R.R., xii, no. 1166; not in B.N.B.

5. Supra 331