Difference between revisions of "STAC Clere"

From Rpalmer
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
''' B ''' Bill of Complaint ''' Dr ''' Demurrer  ''' A ''' Answer ''' Rn ''' Replication ''' Rr ''' Rejoinder
 +
''' C ''' Commission ''' I ''' Interrogatories ''' D ''' Deposition
 +
<BR> <BR>
 +
 
''' Clere, Benjamin '''
 
''' Clere, Benjamin '''
 
*STAC 5/C70/2 - B A C - 16 Eliz - Benjamin Clere, Robert Mott v Matthew Stephens, John Wood et al
 
*STAC 5/C70/2 - B A C - 16 Eliz - Benjamin Clere, Robert Mott v Matthew Stephens, John Wood et al
Line 15: Line 19:
 
*STAC 5/C62/34 - B A - 29 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Fysher, John Basely
 
*STAC 5/C62/34 - B A - 29 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Fysher, John Basely
 
*STAC 5/C37/2 - I D - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v John Baseley
 
*STAC 5/C37/2 - I D - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v John Baseley
 +
*STAC 5/C67/33 - B - 39 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v Gilbert Parker, Christopher Langdon et al
 +
 +
''' Clere, Edward '''
 
*STAC 5/C24/33 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Humston et al  
 
*STAC 5/C24/33 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Humston et al  
 
*STAC 5/C3/35 - Rn - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Cleare v Robert Huninston, Richard Brooke, Robert Leader, John Boul, Simon Ballard et al  
 
*STAC 5/C3/35 - Rn - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Cleare v Robert Huninston, Richard Brooke, Robert Leader, John Boul, Simon Ballard et al  
 
*STAC 5/C16/5 - I D - 35 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Hinaston et al  
 
*STAC 5/C16/5 - I D - 35 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Hinaston et al  
*STAC 5/C67/33 - B - 39 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v Gilbert Parker, Christopher Langdon et al
+
**[[STAC co Suffolk]]
  
 
'''Attorney General'''
 
'''Attorney General'''
*STAC 5/A18/25 - Rn - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Cleare
 
 
*STAC 5/A32/39 - B A Dr - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v William Gressham, Edward Cleere, Thomas Sego, Thomas Jackson, John Browne, Edmond Newarck, John Hamonde, [blank] Bushell
 
*STAC 5/A32/39 - B A Dr - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v William Gressham, Edward Cleere, Thomas Sego, Thomas Jackson, John Browne, Edmond Newarck, John Hamonde, [blank] Bushell
**Bill of Edward Coke Attorney General, Answer of Edward Clere, Answer of Thomas Sego, Demurrer of William Gressham
+
*STAC 5/A18/25 - Rn - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Cleare
 
*STAC 5/A31/29 - I D - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Clere, William Gresham, John Brown et al
 
*STAC 5/A31/29 - I D - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Clere, William Gresham, John Brown et al
 +
**[[STAC co Norfolk]]
  
 
'''Almoner'''
 
'''Almoner'''
Line 45: Line 52:
 
'''Notes, Additions and Corrections:'''  
 
'''Notes, Additions and Corrections:'''  
 
*See also [[STAC Clare]]
 
*See also [[STAC Clare]]
*STAC 5/A32/39 - Corruption in raising of soldiers in Norfolk (and at Harwich)
+
*Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 30v. The proper name in a subpoena razed out of the label thereof which was mistaken Thomas for William 20s cost. Cleere, plaintiff; Davies, defendant. A subpoena served on the defendant, and the label thereof was razed and his first name left out because they had mistaken the name, Thomas for William, and so the process unduly served for which the defendant had 20s costs and the razure of the same subpoena ordered to be examined. Trinity 17 Elizabeth (kk)
*STAC 5/A32/39 - Answer of Edward Clere. Demurrer of William Gressham. Answer of Thomas Sego. Bill of Edward Coke Att Gen
+
*STAC 5/A32/39 - Answer of John Hamonde: “often time repaired unto him unto him in the behalf of one Symonde Thayne of Attleborough to the ende to procure his discharge, whereupon by his importunate sute unto him this defendant being moved with pittye on the greivous complaint . . . did goe unto one John Browne who did kepe the Recorde or booke of the souldiers names desiring him to discharge the said Thayne out of the booke, if it were possible, who answered that he durst not do it because Mr Gressham had his name in his book. Thayne (or his wife) paid 30s to Brown.
+
*STAC 5/C16/5 - Interrs refer to tithes of corn, wool & lamb of Elneden, Suffolk.(dk)
+
*Biography in “The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603,” ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981
+
**CLERE, Edward (1536-1606), of Blickling, Norf.
+

Latest revision as of 08:40, 27 April 2019

B Bill of Complaint Dr Demurrer A Answer Rn Replication Rr Rejoinder C Commission I Interrogatories D Deposition

Clere, Benjamin

  • STAC 5/C70/2 - B A C - 16 Eliz - Benjamin Clere, Robert Mott v Matthew Stephens, John Wood et al
  • STAC 5/C79/30 - Rn - Benjamin Clere Sr, Robert Motte et al v John Lone, John Wood

Clere, Edward

  • STAC 5/C76/33 - B - 3 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Edwards, William Drury et al
  • STAC 5/C4/4 - B A - 26 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Edwards, John Shering, William Drury, Walter Betes et al
  • STAC 5/C81/20 - Rn - Edward Clere v John Edwards, Davye Evance et al
  • STAC 5/C55/22 - I D - 17 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Edwards, Robert Abraham et al
  • STAC 5/C56/38 - B A Rr - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v John Huggon, John Smith
  • STAC 5/C73/37 - I D - Eliz - Sir Edward Cleere v Thomas Hogan, John Smith et al
  • STAC 5/C57/21 - C I D - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v John Smyth et al
  • STAC 5/C67/8 - B A - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v Christopher Fulmestone
  • STAC 5/C48/26 - I D - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v Thomas Fulmerston, Christopher Fulmerston
  • STAC 5/C62/34 - B A - 29 Eliz - Edward Clere v John Fysher, John Basely
  • STAC 5/C37/2 - I D - 29 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v John Baseley
  • STAC 5/C67/33 - B - 39 Eliz - Sir Edward Clere v Gilbert Parker, Christopher Langdon et al

Clere, Edward

  • STAC 5/C24/33 - B A C I D - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Humston et al
  • STAC 5/C3/35 - Rn - 36 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Cleare v Robert Huninston, Richard Brooke, Robert Leader, John Boul, Simon Ballard et al
  • STAC 5/C16/5 - I D - 35 Eliz - Suffolk - Sir Edward Clere v Robert Hinaston et al

Attorney General

  • STAC 5/A32/39 - B A Dr - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v William Gressham, Edward Cleere, Thomas Sego, Thomas Jackson, John Browne, Edmond Newarck, John Hamonde, [blank] Bushell
  • STAC 5/A18/25 - Rn - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Cleare
  • STAC 5/A31/29 - I D - 37 Eliz - Norfolk - AG v Edward Clere, William Gresham, John Brown et al

Almoner

  • STAC 5/A56/11 - I D - 31 Eliz - Almoner v Benjamin Clere et al

Bevan Case Index

  • Attorney General v Clare - STAC 5/A32/39, STAC 5/A18/25, STAC 5/A31/29
  • Clare v Baseley - STAC 5/C37/2
  • Clare v Edwards - STAC 5/C4/4, STAC 5/C76/33, STAC 5/C55/22, STAC 5/C81/20
  • Clare v Fisher - STAC 5/C62/34
  • Clare v Fulmerston - STAC 5/C67/8, STAC 5/C48/26
  • Clare v Hogan - STAC 5/C56/38, STAC 5/C57/21, STAC 5/C73/37
  • Clare v Hunston - STAC 5/C24/33, STAC 5/C3/35, STAC 5/C16/5
  • Clare v Johnson - STAC 5/C69/29 STAC Cheere
  • Clare v Parker - STAC 5/C67/33
  • Clare v Stephens - STAC 5/C70/2, STAC 5/C79/30
  • Clare v Vernon - STAC 5/C53/20
  • Queen's Almoner v Clare - STAC 5/A56/11

Notes, Additions and Corrections:

  • See also STAC Clare
  • Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 30v. The proper name in a subpoena razed out of the label thereof which was mistaken Thomas for William 20s cost. Cleere, plaintiff; Davies, defendant. A subpoena served on the defendant, and the label thereof was razed and his first name left out because they had mistaken the name, Thomas for William, and so the process unduly served for which the defendant had 20s costs and the razure of the same subpoena ordered to be examined. Trinity 17 Elizabeth (kk)