Bristol and Bristol case in a action of covenant the case be this lessee for  year make a assignment for part of the term videlicet for year Godbolt and the  assignee covenant to repair c the first lessee devise the reversion of the  term and die the devisee of the reversion bring a action of covenant against  the assignee for year and the question be if the devisee of the reversion be  but a termor be within the statute of h of condition second whether the action  will lie because no notice be give of the grant of the reversion dodderidge  sergeant to the first point say that this grant of the reversion be not within  the statute for the statute be that the grantee shall have such remedy as the  say lessors or grantors themselves or their heir or successor shall have have  so as the statute shall he intend of a reversion in fee for the statute do not  provide but in case where heir or successor shall have action and not in case  where the action do belong to executor for the second point he rely upon  Mallories case where it be say that the tenant be to have Godbolt er p notice  of the assignment of the reversion cook chief justice I hold that the assignee  of the reversion for year in this case shall have a action of coveniant by the  statute it be Leonards case in the time of the Lord dyer when I be a reporter  in this court in Leonards case lessee for year lease over part of the term  upon condition which be so much as a covenant and afterward grant the  reversion and it be rule that the grantee may enter for the condition break  and the reason as I rememher be because that executor be name in the statute  but I will not charge my memory with the reason but I be well assure that the  case be rule as I have say dodderidge it be so that within the statute  executor be name but not the executor of he who have the reversion but only  the executor of the lessee and therefore the name of executor in the statute  do not make against we but the Lord cook say what answer you to Leonards case  for the three point cook chief justice and foster justice hold that there need  not any notice in this case because there be not any penalty in the case as be  in Hallories case for there be a condition Warburton justice I doubt the first  point for he who bring the action upon the statute ought to have the whole  reversion and so be winter case in dyer cook and foster say it needs not that  he who be to take advantage by this statute shall have the whole reversion for  it have be adjudge ttat if the reversion he grant in tail that the grantee  shall take advantage of this statute and shall enter for the condition break  Godbolt pasch JAcow in the common plead