J. 7 Page. ton 256 K. 245 390 Page. 455 30 Jones o. Davison Others cutors of Houston, o. Ro Kemble and Others v. At- kins and Another 427 Horsefall 0. Davy Hindle v. Bell and Ano L. , ther Hastings and Others v. Wil. Lewis o. Smith, Esq. son and Others 290 Levy v. Costerton Hart o. Biggs Levi and Others, ExecuHart d. White 376 tors of Angelo Levi, v. Harman o. Lasbrey Barnes Headlam o. Hedley 463 Litt and Another o. CowHedley v. La Page ley and Others 938 Head and Another 0. Lord Mayor of London v. Sewell 363 Joseph Israel Brandon 438 Hedbergh and Another v. Lee v. Munn 569 Pearson 349 Lovelock v. Cheveley 552 Houstman o. Thornton Lowden and Another o. Hill o. Leigh and Reay, Hierons Sheriff of Middlesex 217 Harding o. Greening 531 Hutchinson o. Gascoigne 507 May and Others o. Christie 67 Hughes d. Morley Marsh v. Pedder 72 Humble o. Hunt Morris v. Stacey 153 Hay and Another o. Monk Milne o. Prest house and Another 609 Mitchell and Others v. La. Hartley v. Harriman : 617 page 253 Hodgson v. Scarlett, Esq. 621 M^Cloughan o. Clayton and Hurd o. Brydges 654 Riding 478 Hardman v. Clegg 657 | Mills v. Spencer Vol. I. 647 M. 181 538 Page. 197 321 N. Rex v. Smith Pearce and Others o. Cowie 69 Stewart o. Smith Simpson o. Bliss 273 541 Sharp o. Scoging Smith o. Horne and Others 644 383 442 368 | Taylor and Others v. Cur- Rex v. Akenhead 192 Richards o. Lord Milsing Tarn v. Heys and Another, W. Page. Page. Wakefield v. Gall 526 Withers and Others v. Lys and Another 18 Wood and Another o. Zimmer and Others Yeates and Another v. Pim 122 95 · Warner and Another v. Barber 175 2. Weyland o. Elkins Wright o. Horton 458 Zwinger and Another v. Wyatt o. Gore 299 | Samuda 995 227 SSUMPSIT by the steward of the manors of In an action by the steward rey, against the defendant, for fees claimed to be a particular rate of fees due for his admission to six separate copyhold claimed to be due to him estates, under the will of his father. -Plea the gene- from a tenant on his admisral issue, and 201. paid into Court. sion to six several copyhold estates, if he The plaintiff had been charged with distinct and fail to establi a custom for entire fees for his admission to the several copyhold his charges, he may, notestates. Six admissions had been entered upon withstanding, resort to a the Court rolls, copies of which had been made quantum meruit. Held afterward by the Court, that where a person is admitted to several distinct copyhold tenements, the steward of the manor is not entitled, without proving a custom, to full fees on each admission, separately; but he may stand on his quantum meruit. Vol. I. |