Page 211
CCLXXVI. Johnson and Bellamy's Case. Rot. 824. Mich. 30 & 31 Eliz. In the Common Pleas.
IN an Ejectione firmae, It was holden by Special Verdict,* 1.1 That W. Graunt was seised of certain Lands, and by his Will devised the same to Joan his Wife for life: And further he willed, That when Rich. his Brother should come to the age of 25 years, that he should have the Land to him and the Heirs of his body lawfully be∣gotten. W. Graunt died, having Issue of his body who was his Heir. Rich. before he attained the age of 25 years, levied a Fine of the said Lands with proclamations in the life and during the sei∣sin of Joan to A. sic ut partes finis nihil habuerunt: And, If this Fine should bar the Estate in tail, was the Question? And the Iustices cited the Case of the Lord Zouch, which was adjudged, Mich. 29 Eliz. Where the Case was, Tenant in tail discontinued to E. and afterwards levied a Fine to B. That although that partes finis nihil habuerunt, yet the said Fine did bind the Estate tail. But the Serjeants at the Bar argued, That there was a difference between the Case cited, and the Case at Bar: For in the Case cited, the Fine was pleaded in Bar; but here it was not pleaded, but found by Special Verdict. To which it was said by the Court, That the same is not any difference; For the Fine by the Statute is not any matter of Estoppel or Conclusion, but by the Statute binds and extincts the entail, and the right of it. And Fines are as sufficient to bind the right of the entail when they are found by Special Verdict, as when they are pleaded in Bar.
And Periam, Iustice, said, A Collateral Warranty found by Special Verdict, is of as great force, as pleaded in Bar. And after∣wards Iudgment was given, That the Estate tail by that Fine was utterly barred and extinct.