ccv CADEE and Oliver case in a ejection strong by Cadee against Oliver of a  house in Holborn c the case be the Lord Mountjoy and the lady Katherine his  wife seize of the say house and of other land in fee in the right of the wife  Elizabeth acknowledge a statutestaple of l to sir Lionel ducat afterward  Elizabeth the say Lord Mountjoy and his say wife lease the say house to  Hoskins for year and afterward by indenture Elizabeth they lease the same to  sir though cotton for year to begin at Michaelmas last pass Elizabeth sir  Lionel ducat extend his statute and the land extend be deliver to he at S per  annum who hold the same until Elizabeth year Elizabeth the Lord Mountjoy and  his wife levy a fine to very to the use of very and his heir Elizabeth sir  Thomas cotton not be upon the land grant in all respects tune good catalla  svan to Robert cotton his son Elizabeth the lady Mountjoy die mich Elizabeth  the lease to Hoskins expire very enter and lease the house to Oliver the  defendant for year and afterward Robert cotton enter and lease the house c to  the plaintiff it be first move by Brantingham and argue by he if this lease  for year which be make to begin after the lease make to Hoskins shall pass to  Robert cotton by the word aforesaid but the court ease he from argue of that  point for it be hold that it pass notwithstanding the word tunc another matter  argue by he be because at the time of the grant the land be in extent and so  the say sir Thomas cotton have but a possibility if therefore the say grant  make during the extent be Leonard good and he argue that it be for it be more  than a bare possibility for it be a interest vest and in some case a  possibility may be grant as h the king grant to a prior that when any ten be  grant to the king by the clergy his house shall be discharge of it c and e  avowry the lord grant to his tenant that if be die his heir within age that  such heir shall not be in ware so e a grant unto a abbot to be discharge of  the collectorship of ten when it shall be grant by the clergy it have be  object that the term for year be suspend therefore it can be grant during the  suspension but the same be not so for a thing suspend may be grant as  Elizabeth dyer husband and wife jointtenants of land in fee the queen have a  rend out of it in fee give the rend to the husband and his heir now the  husband devise the say rend and die the same be good a devise notwithstanding  the suspension and he cite the case e quid law proclaim and e ibidem a lease  be make to one for life and if be die within year that his executor and assign  shall hold the land until the expiration of the year the say interest may be  grant which Wray chief justice deny see Gravenors case man dyer such interest  be void it be further move by he and argue if the conusee of the fine may  avoid the lease make to sir Thomas cotton and be say he can not for he be in  under the lessors so be e recovery in value see the case there and here  although the wife after the death of her husband may affirm or disaffirm the  lease at her election yet this election be not transfer to the conusee by the  fine but the conusee shall be bind by the fine see h dyer as tenant in tail  make a lease for year not warrant by the statute and die the issue alien the  land by fine before affirmation or disaffirmation of the lease by acceptance  or entry the conusee can avoid this lease for the liberty Leonard er p be not  transfer which gawdy justice to go away and election can be transfer over to  the prejudice of another person as if a rend de to make new be grant to the  father in fee who die before election the heir can make it a annuity to defeat  the dower of the wife quod curian to go away it be also move by Brantingham if  the lessee may enter upon the conusee of the statute after his extent expire  without sue forth a to know facias but the court discharge he from argue that  point for that by the death of the lady Mountjoy the extent be void and  therefore the feoff or conusee may avoid it byentry and so Wray chief justice  say it have be adjudge in the court of common plea at another day the case be  argue by Stephens on the part of the plaintiff who say that the extent by  computation of time accord to the value to which it be extend be not yet  satisfy the verdict have find that Leonard the extent continue until Elizabeth  but do not say that it be then expire and end and I conceive also that this  extent do not evict the interest of sir Thomas cotton or turn it into a  possibility the extent be quousq leve denarii but yet a limitation of time be  in law understand although by a casualty such time may be abridge or extend  which see h by Fairfax where a man be bind by statute to pay and the conusee  sue execution upon it and the land extend be rate at per annum now it shall be  intend by a common intent that in year the party may be satisfy and therefore  after the year the conusor shall have a to know facias so upon the matter it  be a lease for year so h by Keble to the same purpose and e by Brian for the  law shall not intend a casualty without allege of it for the same shall not be  by imagination and therefore if the conusor will have the land within the term  he ought to allege that the conusee have levy the duty by a extraordinary  casualty and show it special and so where the conusor sue a to know facias and  the conusee will hold the land over he ought express to surmise some  extraordinary occasion wherefore he can not levy the duty upon the land within  the term which see by Brian e and e the conusee of a statute after extent make  a lease for year yet it may be that the duty shall be levy within one year but  if it be so then a to know facias shall issue forth against the conusee and  not against the lessee for the law intend that the whole estate of the conusee  be not grant but that he have a reversion in he but if he have grant his whole  estate then a to know facias shall issue forth against the grantee so here  although that this extent in our case will continue by computation of time for  some of the year of the term grant to sir Thomas cotton yet it be intend that  the extent do run out and be determine before the expiration of sir Thomas  cotton term so as notwithstanding that sir Thomas cotton have a interest leave  in he which he may grant it will be object how can it be say a estate for year  when as he may hold over the year as to that such a interest may be put off in  diverse case as h a man grant to another the three avoidance of such a church  and die seize his wife be endow of the church she shall have the three  avoidance and the grantee shall have the that avoidance and so per ankle to  come between opportunity the benefit shall be delay and so here in our case  and then the estate by extent be prima fancy certain so as it can by  intendment surmount the term of sir though cotton as it appear upon the extent  the estate shall be take to continue accord to the extent of the year and then  a certain interest do remain in sir Thomas cotton which he may grant over  which be not a possibility but rather a reversion so and to such purpose be  the case of h if the old son enter after the death of big father and afterward  big mother recover Leonard dower that shall take away the possessto brother  but if the son make a lease for life and the wife recover dower against the  lessee there shall be possessto brother for the reversion do remain in the  lessor notwithstanding the eviction of the estate for life and h there it be  hold by Goddard and strange that where the term of the wife be extend upon the  statute of the husband who die the wife shall have the residue of the term and  avoid the extent as to her term which prove that all the term be not draw to  the conusee by the extent but that a interest do remain in the lessee  notwithstanding that and see by Seton ass if lessee for life leas to he in the  reversion for life yet he have a reversion in he and ass a be Leonard er p  bind by statute to b and his land extend by force of it c recover against b in  debt and the land extend by he upon the statute be now extend by elegit a  grant his estate to the conusee it be no surrender which prove that b have a  interest and so in our case a interest do remain in sir Thomas cotton  notwithstanding the extent a make a lease for year to begin at a day to come  and before the day a be seize the lessee notwithstanding this seize may grant  his interest for he never be in possession and therefore it can be turn into a  right as to the second point if Robert cotton may enter within the time of the  extent without a to know facias and that rest upon this point if this lease  shall be subject to the extent I conceive clear that it shall not it have be  say that our lease be not good but I conceive it without question that our  lease be good enough for it be make by the husband and wife and the wife after  the death of her husband by acceptance of the rend may affirm the lease but  the statute be the act of the husband alone therefore the conusee of the fine  shall not avoid the lease for it be but voidable so the king grant land  durante pleasure and afterward grant the reversion over the patentee shall not  avoid the estate but if this lease have be make by the husband only it have be  void and then the conusee of the fine shall avoid it as it be late adjudge in  harvey and Thomas case and I conceive that if tenant in tail acknowledge a  statute and afterward make a lease accord to the statute of h and die the  lessee shall not hold the land subject to the statute for then the rend shall  not be pay to the issue in tail during the statute which be against the stat  of h and see also Elizabeth dyer the chaplain of a donative chapel lease for  year which be confirm by the patron who be tenant in tail of the patronage  which be appendant to a manor whereof he be seize in tail and afterward he  have issue and die the statute of chantry come after the death of the  incumbent the king shall avoid this lease and in our case after the coverture  the conusee be in Leonard by the wife and then be shall avoid the statute  extend upon it and if so then there need not any to know facias as the issue  in tail may enter upon the conusee of a statute acknowledge by his father for  if execution have be sue against the issue in tail it have be a seize and see  r that in such case the wife or her heir may enter upon the conusee and by  consequence the conusee who be in by her c cook contrary I conceive that this  grant of this lease by sir Thomas cotton to his son be not good for it be but  a possibility and no interest I agree all the case which have be put before  for law but they can be apply to this case the book in h be that if the term  of the wife be extend upon the statute of the husband that the wife shall have  the residue after the death of the husband but it do not say that the wife or  her husband may grant it during the extent which be the matter now in question  and I conceive that sir Thomas cotton have but a possibility for the conusee  upon the extent have but a incertain interest and although it may be by some  mean reduce to a certainty in the chancery where the cost and damage shall be  assess yet until it be reduce to a certainty it can be grant and therefore it  be clear that if I have a term for year in land and grant it unto another  until he have levy and all his cost of suit for it by this grant all the  interest of the term be in the grantee and nothing be in I but a possibility  and so it be hold in the common plea by the Lord Anderson the day when he be  make chief justice there at which time this case be put land of the yearly  value of be lease to one until be have levy and the matter be what estate the  grantee have and it be hold that if livery be not make that be have but a  estate at will for the profit of the land be incertain the one year more and  the other year less and Bromley Lord chancellor be then of the same opinion  then if in case of a lease it be so it shall also be so in case of a extent  and in both the case the whole interest be out of the party and Elizabeth the  case be in this court that the lessee for year devise his term to his executor  for the payment of his debt and legacy and after the payment of they the  residue of the year he devise to his son the executor enter which be a assent  to the remainder he in the remainder grant his interest and it be hold void  because it be but a possibility and so incertain and although it may be reduce  to a Leonard er p certainty afterward yet the same be not sufficient for it  ought to be reduce to a certainty at the time of the grant and Elizabeth n  this court the case be that land be give to the husband and wife and to the  heir of the husband the husband make a lease for year and die the wife enter  and entermarrieth with the lessee and it be move if the interest of the lessee  by the entermarriage be extinct and it be hold that Leonard it be not for it  be but a possibility and not a interest quod to be concession per totan curian  and if a possibility can be extinct then it can be grant and he deny the case  put by Stephens where a man seize of land leas the same for year to begin at a  day to come and afterward before the day the lessor be seize now during that  seize the grantee can enter for his future interest for the feesimple be turn  into a right so also shall be the interest and that be prove by Delameres case  a feoff in fee be make to the use of a for life and afterward to the use of c  for life and afterward to the use of d in fee and afterward a feoff a stranger  who have notice of the use the same do take away all the other use and say  feoff although he have notice of the use yet be shall not be seize to the  first use for the estate out of which the first use do arise be take away and  then also the use and he say also that the lease make to sir Thomas cotton be  not good for it be make Elizabeth and it be find by verdict that Elizabeth a  writ of extent issue forth upon the statute then be the land in the hand of c  during which time the Lord Mountjoy and his wife can not make the lease  aforesaid to the say sir Thomas cotton and as to that see e return of the  sheriff see the case of e dyer Stringfellows case then admit the lease to sir  Thomas cotton yet the lessee can put out the conusee without a to know facias  for the conusee be in by matter of record also here this lease make by the  husband and wife without any rend reserve be utter void and then the conusee  shall take advantage of it h e and so be it rule in the case of older man  pvero in the case of a enfant and see Elizabeth dyer where the provost of well  be parson impersonee of the patronage of W lease the tithe for year render  rend which be confirm by the dean and chapter but not by the patron and  ordinary and afterward by Act of parliament the provostry be unite to the  deanery cum primo to be empty to touch the provost die the dean accept the  rend the same shall not bind the church for the lease be void as it be of a  parson or prebend c and so the dean shall take advantage of it although not  privy to it see Elizabeth dyer land give to a parson and his successor for to  find light and be leas the same for life the rend be so employ accord the  incumbent die the successor accept the rend the king grant it over the  patentee shall avoid the lease as the successor may have do before the statute  if he have not accept the rend but the acceptance before the statute shall  bind the successor for that it be but a voidable lease and the case between  harvey and Thomas which have be put on the other side serve to our purpose for  there the conusee shall avoid a lease in law which be void and here in the  principal case the lease be void for that no rend be reserve upon it wherefore  c it be adjourn cro roll title grant cro roll roll cro Inst b   Mannings case  Leonard mich Elizabeth in the king bench