Acórdão em relação judging the defendant Catarina Gonçalves as the legitimate administrator of the chapel founded by Afonso Domingues Bochardo. Her father Bento Gonçalves has died without a male son. She will succeed to her father, because she is descendant of the institutor, but from now on the sons will have preference over the daughters.

Acórdão em relação (transcription) judging D. Maria de Lencastre as the rightful successor of the entail of João Gomes da Silva, since she was the daughter of the penultimate administrator, João Gomes da Silva, the sister of Luís da Silva, the last administrator, and the entail was not of agnatic succession, as Fernando Teles de Meneses, plaintiff and D. Maria's uncle, argued.
It is mentioned that João Gomes da Silva founded an entail through his will and left it to his only son, Luís da Silva, declaring that its succession should respect the clauses determined by Rui Teles, his grandfather, when he instituted the entail which was eventually inherited by João's father, Brás Teles. Luís da Silva inherited that entail and the patronage of the monastery of Chagas of Lamego.

Acórdão em Relação that revokes a previous sentence from Desembargadores dos Agravos, judging António de Saldanha, qualified opponent, who presented a supplication, as the rightful successor of the entails of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, and Vale de Sobrados, founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, because it is proven that those who were not born when the last administrator died can succeed.

Acórdão em Relação that revokes a previous sentence from Desembargadores dos Agravos, judging António de Saldanha, qualified opponent, who presented a supplication, as the rightful successor of the entails of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, and Vale de Sobrados, founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, because it is proven that those who were not born when the last administrator died can succeed.

Acórdão em Relação judging Manuel Ferreira de Eça, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Fajozes, founded by Estêvão Ferreira, o Velho, excluding the defendant, D. Francisca da Silva, wife of D. João Manuel de Meneses, because he is male and it is an agnation entail. He also excludes João Machado de Eça, opponent, once he represents his father, Gregório Ferreira de Eça, the opponent's older brother. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão em Relação (transcription) judging the chapel of D. Leonor da Costa, in the convent of S. Francisco of Lisboa and composed of a farmstead in Caparica, as not vacant to the Crown and absolving D. Isabel de Gamboa, defendant, from the requested by Manuel Guedes Pereira, plaintiff, who denounced the chapel as vacant and received a royal grace warrant of administration. It declares D. Isabel de Gamboa as the chapel's rightful successor, because she is cousin of the last administrators, D. Isabel da Costa and D. Francisca da Costa, sisters and successors of Frei Manuel Pacheco, and she is from the institutors bloodline. Although the chapel is from agnation, the women are only excluded if there is a male to succeed, which is not the case.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially confirming and partially revoking the previous sentence from Corregedor do Cível da Corte. It judges Cristóvão de Almada, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entails of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, and Vale de Sobrados, founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, because he was the only candidate already born when his uncle, Luís Francisco de Oliveira, died. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to him the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit until their return. It is proven that the entail of Vale de Sobrados is not separated from the entail of Oliveira and both are administrated by the same person.

Acórdão do Desembargo that partially confirms and partially revokes the previous sentence, condemning D. Francisco de Castelo Branco, plaintiff, to pay to D. Mariana de Castelo Branco, defendant, the entail's income of four years, concerning the two first years of D. António de Castelo Branco's administration and the two first years of D. João de Castelo Branco's administration, both his sons, because all administrators are forced to pay the income of the two first years in real estate to the increase of the entail.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially confirming and partially revoking the previous sentence from Corregedor do Cível da Corte. It judges Cristóvão de Almada, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entails of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, and Vale de Sobrados, founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, because he was the only candidate already born when his uncle, Luís Francisco de Oliveira, died. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to him the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit until their return. It is proven that the entail of Vale de Sobrados is not separated from the entail of Oliveira and both are administrated by the same person.

Court sentence of corregedor, judging a civil process between Simão Álvares, author, against Maria Boução, defendant.
The sentence states that the author had not proved to be the son of João Álvares Boução, that the defendant had proved to be a legitimate daughter of João Dias and that the institution, referring to the institute's closest relative, would not exclude women from the administration.
Absolve the defendant, condemning the plaintiff and opponents at the expense of the lawsuit.
There follows another sentence contrary to the first and a warrant that confirms the first, to the detriment of the second.

Court sentence condemning Mariana Pereira de Melo, qualified defendant, to relinquish to Fernando de Brito e Melo, qualified plaintiff, the assets of the entail of João Vicente, canon of Lisbon, because he is the son of Luís de Brito de Melo, the original plaintiff, who was cousin of André de Brito, the last administrator, and a legitimate male, while the defendat is woman and therefore expressly excluded from the succession by the institutor.

Court sentence judging Maria de Sottomayor Perdigão, plaintiff with her husband, Baltasar Homem da Costa, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Vasco Martins Gavião, because she is the eldest daughter of the last administrator, Pascoal Perdigão, who did not have any son, and from the institutor's bloodline. Contrary to what the defendant, Padre Frei Francisco Soares, prior da igreja de Benavente, who had a right to inherit the chapel if the institutor's line was extinguished, claimed, the intitutor did not exclude women from the chapel's administration and did not establish an exclusive male succession (agnation), allowing for female succession. It condemns the defendant to relinquish the chapel's administration, with its income, since the undue occupation until its return to the plaintiffs.

Court sentence judging the plaintiff, not named, as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Gil Eanes da Costa and D. Joana da Silva, because he is the eldest male son of D. João Mascarenhas and D. Maria da Costa, the daughter of D. António da Costa and last administrator. The plaintiff is forced to annex to the entail, within six months, part of the assets that his mother and grandfather should have entailed. It condemns D. Nuno da Costa, defendant and his younger brother, to relinquish to him the entailed assets with their income generated since the contested lawsuit. The defendant claimed to be the rightful successor of this entail because his brother, the plaintiff, is already the administrator of the entail of a public debt instrument of 100.000 réis founded by Gil Eanes da Costa. It also excludes from the succession D. João da Costa, qualified opponent, who claimed that the plaintiff and defendant are sons of an excluded daughter, since the entail is from agnation.

Court sentence judging the defendant, a woman not named, as the rightful successor of the entails of Gonçalo Domingues and Catarina Vicente, his wife, and Afonso Martins Prezado and Catarina Eanes, his wife, because she is sister of Estácio da Cunha, the last administrator, and his closest relative and it is proven that both entails are not from agnation, as Francisco da Cunha, plaintiff, argued.

Court sentence judging Fernando de Saldanha, represented and administrated by his father, João de Saldanha, opponent, as the rightful successor of the entail of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, because he is the closest male relative of the last administrator, and condemning Cristóvão de Almada, plaintiff, and D. Maria de Oliveira and her husband, D. Diogo de Meneses, defendants, to relinquish to him the entailed assets, with their income generated since the death of D. Pedro, the defendants son, until their return. It is proven that the entail is only of male succession and not of agnation. It also judges that the property of Vale de Sobrados, claimed as belonging to the entail founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, and the properties of the entail of Oliveira belong all to a same entail.

Court sentence absolving António Correia, qualified defendant, from the requested by Estêvão Correia da Cunha, qualified plaintiff, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the entail of Rodrigo Afonso de Atouguia, founded in 1506 in the village of Belas, leased to him by infanta D. Beatriz. The plaintiff can not succeed because his father, Gaspar da Cunha de Mendonça, the original plaintiff, was great-grandson of D. Isabel de Mendonça, sister of Manuel Correia, a previous administrator, who was excluded from the succession for being a woman, as determined by the institutor. It describes the previous proceedings regarding the succession and involving the plaintiffs and defendants.

Court sentence judging D. Mariana de Castelo Branco, minor, defendant, as the rightful successor of the entail of Lumiar, founded by D. Antónia de Castelo Branco, with the condition to marry a descendant by male and legitimate line of the family of Castelo Branco, because it is judged that the entail is from regular succession, allowing female successors. It condemns D. Francisco de Castelo Branco, plaintiff, who argued that it is an agnation entail, to relinquish to the defendant the income imposed in the farm (quinta) of Manuel Guedes Pereira, annexed to the entail.

Court sentence judging the defendant, a woman not named, as the rightful successor of the entails of Gonçalo Domingues and Catarina Vicente, his wife, and Afonso Martins Prezado and Catarina Eanes, his wife, because she is sister of Estácio da Cunha, the last administrator, and his closest relative and it is proven that both entails are not from agnation, as Francisco da Cunha, plaintiff, argued.

Court sentence judging António Henriques Sacoto, defendant, as the rightful successor of the entail of Jerónimo Henrique, against Aires Penteado Osório, plaintiff, and Agostinho de Barros Henrique and Gonçalo Ribeiro Pinto, opponent, because he is the closest relative of the institutor and last administrator by male bloodline.

Court sentence (transcription) judging D. Luísa Maria Antónia de Portugal, defendant, as the rightful successor of the entail of Carlos Nunes, o Velho, and the others annexed to it, because she is the only daughter of Luís de Sá e Meneses, the last administrator, and the entails have a regular succession and are not from agnation, as Manuel Correia de Lacerda, plaintiff and younger brother of Luís de Sá e Meneses, argues. He also argues that the defendant married without her father permission, but it is proven that he approved the marriage and her husband is a nobleman.
Followed by extracts of the will of the institutor (v. VINC001579 CN EA/002).

Court sentence judging Fernando de Saldanha, represented and administrated by his father, João de Saldanha, opponent, as the rightful successor of the entail of Oliveira, founded by D. Martinho Pires de Oliveira, archbishop of Braga, because he is the closest male relative of the last administrator, and condemning Cristóvão de Almada, plaintiff, and D. Maria de Oliveira and her husband, D. Diogo de Meneses, defendants, to relinquish to him the entailed assets, with their income generated since the death of D. Pedro, the defendants son, until their return. It is proven that the entail is only of male succession and not of agnation. It also judges that the property of Vale de Sobrados, claimed as belonging to the entail founded by D. Rodrigo, bishop of Lamego and son of D. Martinho, and the properties of the entail of Oliveira belong all to a same entail.