Court sentence judging D. Veríssimo de Lencastre, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Filipa da Silva, because he is in the same degree as D. Luís Coutinho, who succeeded to the last administrator, D. Luísa de Eça, but he is five years older. It condemns D. Joana Coutinho Côrte-Real, defendant, who owned the entail, claiming to succeed to her uncle, D. Luís Coutinho, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence absolving Alexandre de Távora, defendant, from the requested by Pedro Falcão de Sunega and his wife, D. Catarina de Távora, plaintiffs, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Filipa de Távora, because he is the closest relative of the last administrator, Diogo Teles de Távora, descendant from the legitimate Távoras, and he is from the institutor's bloodline. It mentions the preference for the succession by agnation to preserve the family name of Távora.

Court sentence judging Madre D. Joana de Brito, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entails of Francisco Domingues de Beja, in the farmsteads (herdades) of Freixo and Atouguia, in the outskirts of Beja, and Pedro Quaresma Barreto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Graciosa, in Bemraquam, in the outskirts of Serpa, because she is the closest relative of the last administrator, Martinho Afonso de Brito.

Court sentence judging Catarina Martins, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel and entail of Domingos Vaz Amarelo, who lived in Peniche, since she represents her late father, Gaspar Martins, first born child of Francisco Martins, brother of the institutor, and older brother of Francisco Martins, defendant, both collateral relatives of the institutor and last administrator. It condemns the defendant to relinquish the entailed assets to the plaintiff with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence judging Manuel de Valadares Vieira, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Doutor João de Valadares and Beatriz Lopes de Carvalho, his wife, because he is son of the older sister of the last administrator, Manuel de Valadares, and original defendant, the late Mariana de Valadares. It condemns the defendants, sons and heirs of Mariana de Valadares, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets. It also absolves the defendants from the request of the plaintiff regarding the sucession of the chapel of Manuel de Valadares, located in the cloister of the collegiate church of Nossa Senhora da Oliveira of Guimarães, declaring them as the rightful successors, because the plaintiff is not descendant of the institutor and the benefit of representation ceases in the collateral relatives.

Court sentence revoking a previous sentence from Juiz de Fora of Setúbal. It declares that the succession of the entail of Luís de Barbuda de Melo belongs to D. Juliana de Castro, defendant, because she is the sister of the institutor and first administrator, Francisco Vieira de Castro, although she was not expressly appointed in the foundation deed as the plaintiff, not named. The plaintiff only can succeed after her death, since she is over 60 years old and has no children. It absolves the defendants from relinquishing the entail to the plaintiff.

Court sentence absolving Padre Frei Henrique Coutinho, defendant, from the requested by Luís Gonçalves, plaintiff, and D. Briolanja Coutinho, opponent, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Margarida de Landim, because he is the closest male collateral relative of the institutor, replacing the plaintiff in its administration.

Court sentence condemning Lourenço Cardoso de Sousa, defendant, to relinquish the entail founded by Margarida de Matos to her niece, D. Isabel de Matos, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit, to D. Ana, the qualified plaintiff, granddaughter and heir of the late D. Ana de Matos, granddaughter of Diogo Cardoso, brother of the institutor, and cousin of D. Isabel, last administrator.

Court sentence judging António Dias, plaintiff, as the rightful administrator of the chapel of Maria Nunes, founded in a half of the farmstead (herdade) of Pego da Brunheira, in the outskirts of Santiago, succeeding to the late André Pinela, the institutor's husband, because he is his nephew and ab intestato heir. It condemns Manuel Luís and his wife, defendants, who argue that he is the closest relative of the institutor, to relinquish to the plaintiff the half of the mentioned farmstead, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Royal sentence, judging a civil appeal made by João de Braga, plaintiff, against Duarte Afonso, his brother, defendant, about the succession in the administration of a chapel instituted by Lourenço Martins, in Guimarães.
The sentence absolves the defendant, since the libel of accusation presented by the plaintiff cannot be proved.

Royal sentence concerning the sucession in the administration of the chapel of Joana Ferreira, determing its nomination by the king and that Guiomar Ferreira, niece of Joana Ferreira, who claimed the administration, could not hinder the grant of the administration letter to Francisco de Aguiar. In addition, it was proved that the administrator should be someone outside the institutor's lineage, so the king ordered the grant of the administration letter to Francisco de Aguiar.

Royal sentence by king D. João IV judging a civil process, judged at the Casa da Suplicação, between Pedro Guedes de Proença, plaintiff, against António Guedes de Carvalho, abbot of Lobrigos, defendant, on the administration of the chapel and entail instituted by Gonçalo Vaz Guedes.

Sentence finishing the motion set upon the chapel of Afonso de Torres by its administrator, Luís de Sousa, who is ordered to pay the obligations he owed as a descendant from a colateral line. Francisco de Torres and his wife, D. Maria Henriques, had established a chapel in the name of Afonso de Torres, their father and father-in-law, who had died before making a contract, with an obligation of two weekly masses in the convent of S. Francisco of Lisboa. If the entail was inherited by a descendant from a colateral line, the obligations would change to two daily masses. Luís de Sousa had inherited the entail from its last descendant from a direct line, D. Briolanja.
Followed by acordão em relação agreeing with the sentence, dated 1650-06-24.

Sentence ordering that D. Beatriz de Abreu, widow of doutor Francisco de Figueiroa, be given possession of the chapel established by Isabel Luís in the convent of S. Francisco of Lisboa, which she had inherited from her brother, Cristóvão Leitão, since he had died without direct descendants, and which was entailed to a public debt instrument.
Preceded by an undated petition by D. Beatriz de Abreu, explaining these circunstances and requesting a public debt instrument, and by a justification with testimonies corroborating her plea, dated 1642-02-10.

Subrogation deed by which Álvaro de Sousa Mexia subrogates properties worth 200 000 réis, entailed to the entail established by Pedro Mexia de Magalhães, his uncle, on the other land, in accordance with the respective subrogation warrant and with the acceptance of Diogo de Sousa Mexia, successor in the entail.
Contains the insert 001a.