Wooster v. Parsons
Opinions
1. When an action is brought before any court of limited and inferior jurisdiction, the declaration ought to ayer expressly, that the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the court (2 Ld. Raym. 1310); and the place should be particularly alleged: Neither of which was done with sufficient certainty in the present case. The note on which, etc., is alleged to have been executed in the city aforesaid; the city of New Haven, and the city of Middletown, having been, both before mentioned, therefore, uncertain to which the reference was intended. See Coke on Littleton, 20, a. “If a lease for life is made to A. remainder in tail to B. remainder to O. informa praedicta, the remainder to C. is void for uncertainty.” 2 Ld. Raym. 886-890. Judgment arrested for a like uncertainty. This author makes a distinction between praedicta, and some other relative terms, which he supposes commonly refer to the last antecedent; but that the rule admits of many exceptions.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 Kirby 27 (Wooster v. Parsons) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.