case james cogan against catherine cogan easter term Elizabeth roll refer to  Blackman v fish Ch a seize in fee let to b for life remainder to c for life  provide that if a shall have a son which shall live to the age of five year  the estate limit to c shall cease and the land remain to that son in tail the  estate limit to the son be void because limit on a condition which be to  defeat the precede remainder to c Henry pl Henry pl ante con t   light a a a  noise Max sect and Ro ab Plowd b d ba ab dougl post Ant trespass upon demurrer  the case be that John Cogan be seize in fee and let it to Rohert Cogan for  life remainder to Catherine the defendant for life provide that if John the  lessor have issue a son during his life who shall live to the age of five year  that the estate limit to the defendant Catherine shall cease and it shall  remain to the say son in tail the lessor have issue the plaintiff who attain  his age of five year and whether the remainder limit to the defendant shall  cease and the remainder limit to the plaintiff be good or not be the question  after the sergeant have argue the case it be resolve by the court for the  defendant for Anderson say there be certain rule in law touch remainder  videlicet that a remainder ought to pass at the first by the livery and shall  not take effect with a condition precedent nor shall begin upon such a  condition and although a Perk f n b   light cro James Leon croak Elizabeth er  p Colthursts case give colour thereto and that the remainder in question shall  be good yet he hold not that case to he law in this point for a remainder  depend upona condition precedent be mere void and further in this case a entry  be requisite to avoid the remainder for life for a freehold can determine  without the ceremony of entry but otherwise it be of a lease for year  wherefore this remainder depend upon a limitation which be against the rule of  law be void Walnisley to the same intent the remainder be void by Littleton  and by the ancient ground of a law for the remainder by Littleton ought to  pass at the time of the livery and the nature of a livery be a give and there  can be a give but there ought to be one to take inprcesenti or in expectance  so as the law shall preserve it in the interim and there needs not he any deed  of a remainder which prove that it passes by the livery and by Richilds case  the remainder shall take effect when the particular estate take his effect and  ought to pass present by the livery or otherwise will never pass and although  in Colthursts case the condition he precedent in word yet it be subsequent in  reason wherefore it may be well maintain by law and a remainder can pass by  contingency for then there will a absurdity follow videlicet there shall by  the first livery he a immediate reversion expectant upon the remainder for  life and afterward this remainder shall he turn out and the reversion also and  a new remainder and reversion shall come in place of they so as there shall he  turn out and turn in at several time by one livery which be make at one time  but croak Elizabeth as touch the cease of the estate in remainder he conceive  it may very well e without any entry by the operation of law the particular  estate remainin in be wherefore c Heaumond to the same intent for a remainder  ought to begin and he create with the first livery and concurrent with the  other estate and can afterward begin upon a condition and he say he never have  hear or read that a provisG can create a remainder although it may determine a  remainder but he hold that a remainder of a estate of freehold or inheritance  can cease without entry or claim no more than a estate of freehold in  possession Owen agree with Heaumond in omnibus for the reason before specify  wherefore it be adjudge for the defendant