Difference between revisions of "STAC Clayton"

From Waalt
 
Line 1: Line 1:
''' Clayton, John '''
+
''' Clayton, John '''
*STAC 5/C56/28 - B A Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - John Claydon v George Willows, William Rand, John Wright et al
+
* STAC 5/C56/28 - B A Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - John Claydon v George Willows, William Rand, John Wright et al
*STAC 5/C59/27 - B A Dr C - 39 Eliz - John Clayton, John Bingley v Jagger, Ottywell Rymes


+
* STAC 5/C59/27 - B A Dr C - 39 Eliz - John Clayton, John Bingley v Jagger, Ottywell Rymes
  
''' Clayton, Robert '''
+
''' Clayton, Robert '''
*STAC 5/C49/17 - B - 8 Eliz - Co Lincs - Robert Clayton, John Billingham v Alexander Amotes
+
* STAC 5/C49/17 - B - 8 Eliz - Co Lincs - Robert Clayton, John Billingham v Alexander Amotes
  


''' Clayton, Thomas and Katherine '''
+
''' Clayton, Thomas and Katherine '''
*STAC 5/C22/29 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Clayton et uxor v William Grimes, John Lockowe, Cicely Lockowe  
+
* STAC 5/C22/29 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Clayton et uxor v William Grimes, John Lockowe, Cicely Lockowe
*STAC 5/C68/36 - A - 36 Eliz - Katherine Clayton, Thomas Clayton v Robert Herrot et al

+
* STAC 5/C68/36 - A - 36 Eliz - Katherine Clayton, Thomas Clayton v Robert Herrot et al
*STAC 5/C27/39 - I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Cleaton et al v Robert Harrott

+
* STAC 5/C27/39 - I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Cleaton et al v Robert Harrott

Revision as of 18:49, 22 June 2012

Clayton, John

  • STAC 5/C56/28 - B A Dr C I D - 33 Eliz - John Claydon v George Willows, William Rand, John Wright et al
  • STAC 5/C59/27 - B A Dr C - 39 Eliz - John Clayton, John Bingley v Jagger, Ottywell Rymes

Clayton, Robert

  • STAC 5/C49/17 - B - 8 Eliz - Co Lincs - Robert Clayton, John Billingham v Alexander Amotes

Clayton, Thomas and Katherine

  • STAC 5/C22/29 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Clayton et uxor v William Grimes, John Lockowe, Cicely Lockowe
  • STAC 5/C68/36 - A - 36 Eliz - Katherine Clayton, Thomas Clayton v Robert Herrot et al
  • STAC 5/C27/39 - I D - 36 Eliz - Thomas Cleaton et al v Robert Harrott