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.

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.

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.

Court sentence judging António Manso, legitimate son of Manuel de Abreu, both defendants, as unable to succeed in the administration of the chapel of Maria Sallas, established in 1583, because his father is an illegitimate son. António de Torres Manso, plaintiff, is the closest relative of the last administrator by legitimate lineage and a collateral relative, accepted in the chapel's succession.

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 Álvaro do Quintal Cotta, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail and chapel of António Falcão Cotta and Isabel Correia, his wife, composed of properties in Coruche, because he is the grandson of Gomes do Quintal Cotta, cousin of the institutors, appointed to succeed if their descendants do not have children, belongs to the Cotta's line and is the closest relative of the last administrator, D. Isabel de Castro, the defendant's wife. It condemns José Forjaz de Andrade, defendant, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence ruling as unproven the received articles of court liquidation and as unrealized the oath in litem requested by the author, due to the evidence defect and the cause quality.

Court sentence judging António Lourenço Magro, plaintiff and legitimate son of João Magro, the institutor's nephew, the rightful successor of the chapel of Padre António Gonçalves, although he is a colateral relative, and excluding the defendant, wife of Ambrósio da Silveira, because she is an illegitimate daughter of Padre Francisco Lourenço Magro, the plaintiff's older brother and last administrator. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to the plaintiff the chapel's assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence absolving Benedita de Melo and her son-in-law, José Botelho, defendants, from the requested by the plaintiff, because the defendant is cousin and the closest relative of Francisco de Melo, the last administrator of the entail founded by Cid António Salvago, in the farmstead (quinta) of Santo António de Pera Manca, near Évora, and amended by Baltasar Mendes dos Reis in his will.

Court sentence judging João Mendes Lobo, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Espadeiro, founded by Isabel Martins, because he is the closest relative of Joana Pereira Loba, the last administrator and daughter of Isabel Mendes, so he is from the bloodline of the first administrator, João Mendes Lobo, o Velho. Aires Vasques Lobo, defendant, argued that he is the closest relative of Joana Pereira Lobo, but by his grandfather line, who is not from the first administrator's bloodline.

Court sentence judging the litigation estate as entailed properties and Manuel Jorge, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Luísa Francisca, becauses he is the institutor's closest relative. The plaintiff, António Jorge, claimed the chapel's administration as successor of his father, António Jorge, who suceeded to his daughter, Maria Manuel, and the defendant, António Pires, claimed it as the second husband of Isabel Gonçalves, the second wife of António Jorge. Both plaintiff and defendant are not related to Luísa Francisca.

Court sentence judging the defendant, António Jorge, as the owner of 48 alqueires and a half of wheat bequeathed by Luísa Francisca to mass celebration, as forced heir of his daughter, Maria Manuel, first administrator, who died without descendants. The plaintiff, Manuel Jorge, argued that his children are the intitutor's closest relatives, because he was married to Isabel Jorge, sister of Maria Manuel, the first administrator.

Court sentence (transcription) absolving Manuel Lopes Couceiro, defendant, from the requested by Provedor and Irmãos of Misericórdia of Tentúgal, and confirming him as the rightful successor of the entail founded by Jorge Lopes Gavicho and Maria Nunes, because he is the grandson of a brother of Jorge Lopes Gavicho and the closest relative of the last administrator, António Lopes Gavicho, son of the institutors, who appointed him as his successor. The Misericórdia only has the right to succeed if the institutor's lineage becomes extinct.

Court sentence judging that D. Maior de Mendonça, plaintiff, can not succeed in the entail of Vilar de Frades, later named Rego da Água, founded by D. Jorge Telo and D. Isabel Mascarenhas, his wife, because she is the natural daughter of Francisco de Mendonça Furtado, last administrator, and there is legitimate descandants from the first administrator, D. João Telo, despite being collateral relatives of Francisco de Mendonça Furtado. It also judges the defendant D. António Luís de Sousa, marquês das Minas and great-grandson of D. João Telo, as the rightful successor of the entail. The sentence refers that Francisco de Mendonça Furtado was convicted of the crime lese-majesty and the defendant argues that the plaintiif can not succeed because of that.

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 judging the plaintiff, not named, as the rightful successor of the entail and chapel of Martinho Bolo and Catarina Álvares, his sister, because he is the son of the late Catarina Rodrigues, oldest daughter of Diogo Martins, brother of the institutors and appointed in second place to succeed in the administration. The defendant's wife is also daughter of Diogo Martins, but younger, so she can not succeed while there is descendants from her older sister.

Court sentence judging Madre Isabel da Visitação, opponent, as the rightful successor of the entail of Nuno de Atouguia, because she is a fourth degree relative of the last administrator and a collateral relative of the institutor and from his bloodline. It condemns Manuel Jácome Raposo, current defendant, and D. Maria Clara de Meneses, current plaintiff, also collateral relatives of the institutor, to relinquish to Madre Isabel da Visitação the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence absolving João Pereira Marinho, defendant with Ana Soares de Araújo, his mother and tutor, and judging him as the rightful successor of the chapel of São Sebastião, founded by D. Vasco Marinho in the main church of Monção, because he is the grandson of João Gomes de Sá, older brother of Capitão Pedro Marinho Sottomayor, plaintiff, both cousins of the last administrator, Pedro Marinho.

Court sentence condemning the defendants, the heirs of Gregório Mascarenhas Homem, husband of D. Sebastiana da Câmara, the previous administrator of the entail of Afonso Garcia Tinoco, to pay to the authors, Desembargador Frutuoso de Campos Barreto e D. Isabel Barreta, current administrator, the money of the rescission of a wheat moio census paid by Domingos Cardoso and the remaining 40.000 réis to the fulfilment of the 9000 cruzados bequest lefted by D. Sebastiana da Câmara to D. Maria Barreto. The sentence refers to the rightful succession of the entail.

Court sentence judging João Freire, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Domingos Rodrigues, because his mother, Maria da Rosa, sister of Manuel, first administrator, and niece of the institutor, and her descendants were expressly appointed to succeed in the entail if her brothers did not have children. It condemns Antónia Freire, defendant, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets, with their income generated since the undue occupation.

Court sentence absolving Luís Esmeraldo da Atouguia , defendant from the requested by Francisco Gonçalves da Câmara, on behalf of Luís da Câmara Esmeraldo, his minor son, plaintiff, and confirming him as the rightful successor of the entail of João Esmeraldo, o Velho, and Águeda de Abreu, his wife, because he is a legitimate collateral relative of D. Isabel Esmeralda, the last administrator, and descendant of the institutors and first administrator, while the plaintiff e a natural and legitimated collateral relative.

Court sentence judging that the entail of Leonor Gil belongs to Maria Lopes, defendant, and not to Domingos Gonçalves, plaintiff, because it is proven that she is from the institutor's bloodline and the closest relative of Helena Gil, her half sister, last administrator and the institutor's niece.

Court sentence judging the hindrances made by the embargoing party, Manuel Martins de Alvito and Manuel Rodrigues de Carvalhal, as unproven and the donation made by the chapel's institutor, Maria Martins, to the embargoed party, Manuel Simões and his wife, Francisca Martins, as good. The embargoing party argued that the estate donated by Maria Martins belongs to them, because they are her cousins and she died ab intestata, since she was not in her right mind when she wrote her will. The embargoed party stated that Maria Martins donated them her estate and appointed them to the chapel's administration, because she had not forced heirs.

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 Manuel Rodrigues, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Gonçalo Rodrigues and Inês Fradessa, because he represents his late father, João Rodrigues, brother of the last administrator, Padre Manuel Rodrigues. It condemns Sebastião Fernandes, defendant, younger brother of Padre Manuel Rodrigues and João Rodrigues, to relinquish to the plaintiff both chapels, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence absolving Luís de Barros de Anaia, defendant, from the requested by Gonçalo Fernandes de Montóia, plaintiff, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the two chapels founded by Jerónimo de Barros, or each one of his two sons António and Julião, and the chapel founded by Guiomar Soares, her cousin, because he is the grandson of António de Barros, the institutor's brother, who was appointed, with his children, to succeed if the institutor's lineage is extinguished, so he is the closest collateral relative of the institutor and last administrator, Maria Tavares.

Court sentence absolving Luís de Barros de Anaia, defendant, from the requested by Gonçalo Fernandes de Montóia, plaintiff, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the two chapels founded by Jerónimo de Barros, for each one of his sons, and the chapel founded by Guiomar Soares, her cousin, because he is the grandson of António de Barros, the institutor's brother, who was appointed, with his children, to succeed if the institutor's lineage is extinguished, so he is the closest collateral relative of the institutor and last administrator, Maria Tavares.

Court sentence judging Estêvão Mascarenhas da Gama, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Beatriz Mascarenhas, because he is the legitimate son of Fernando Mascarenhas, the institutor's nephew, appointed in third place if there is no descendants from the first appointees, and he is relative to the last administrator, Soror Serafina de S. Bento, by the institutor's bloodline. It condemns Cristóvão Lobo de Brito, defendant, to relinquish the chapel's properties to the plaintiff, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return.

Court sentence judging Diogo de Sousa, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail founded by Álvaro de Sousa and Francisca de Távora and later ratified, added and amended by Gaspar de Sousa, D. Maria de Meneses, his wife, and Álvaro de Sousa, their son, because he was appointed to succeed to his brother, Álvaro de Sousa, last administrator, if he did not have any male son, with the condition of marrying his daughter, D. Maria Francisca de Sousa, defendant, altought this marriage did not take place since D. Maria Francisca de Sousa did not want. It condemns the defendant to relinquish the entail to the plaintiff, with its income generated since the death of Álvaro de Sousa until its return.

Court sentence judging Gregório Dias, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Ângela da Rosa, because he is the closest relative of the institutor and he is poor, as determined by the institutor. It condemns Vicente Carreira de Almada, opponents defedants, to relinquish to the plaintiff the chapel and its assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence condemning the defendants, who replaced the original defendant, Francisco Barbosa Aranha, to relinquish the entail founded in 1565 by António Barbosa Aranha and Ana Baldaia, his wife, with the income generated since the contested lawsuit to the eldest son of Doutor Sebastião Pereira Barbosa, original plaintiff, who is the closest relative of the institutor. Since the opponent, D. Isabel Barbosa, nun in the monastery of Vairão, great-granddaughter of the institutors, is already dead, the collateral relatives, as the plaintiffs and defendants, can claim the entail's succession.

Court sentence (transcription) absolving Maria Barreto, defendant, from the request by the plaintiff, not named, and judging her as the rightful successor of the entail of Beatriz Escórcio, which had properties in Santa Cruz. The defendant and the plaintiff are both great-granddaughters of João Rodrigues Escórcio, the institutor's nephew and second administrator, but the defendant is older. Besides, the representation benefit, invoked by the plaintiff, does not apply in this case because they are collateral relatives of the institutor and last administrator, D. Ana do Evangelista.

Court sentence (transcription) judging Mariana de Morais, plaintiff, as the righful successor of the entail of Sebastião de Morais, because she is the daughter of Clara de Morais, sister of the institutor and of João de Morais, first administrator of the entail, who died without successors. Mariana de Morais succeded Eugénia da Veiga, wife of the first administrator and mother, with her second husband, of João Godinho, defendant. Besides the defendant, strange to the institutor's lineage, it excludes the opponents. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to the plaintiff the alienated properties.

Court sentence condemning João de Carvalho, defendant, to relinquish the assets of the entail of António Carvalho and Maria Carvalho, his wife, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit to António Carvalho, plaintiff, declared as its rightful successor, because males are preferred in its succession. The last administrator, António Mendes de Carvalho, appointed Maria Carvalho, his niece, as his successor, but the plaintiff, his cousin, contested this appointment and argued that, although he could appoint a successor if he does not have descendants, he should prefer a male over a female.

Court sentence judging Vicência Gomes, the defendant's wife, as the rightful successor of the entail of Ângela da Rosa and absolving her from the requested by the plaintiff, because she is cousin and the closest relative of Simoa dos Santos, the last administrator. Besides that, her husband is poor and this was a condition imposed by the institutor, although it was only imposed to the successor appointed by her husband, the first nominee.

Court sentence absolving Luís de Barros de Anaia, defendant, from the libel requested by Gonçalo Fernandes de Montóia, plaintiff, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the two chapels founded by Jerónimo de Barros, for each of his two sons, António and Julião, and of the chapel founded by Guiomar Soares, his cousin, because he is the grandson of António de Barros, the institutor's brother, who was appointed, with his children, to succeed if the institutor's lineage is extinguished, so he is the closest collateral relative of the institutor and last administrator, Maria Tavares.

Court sentence judging Manuel Rodrigues, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Gonçalo Rodrigues and Inês Fradessa, because he represents his late father, João Rodrigues, brother of the last administrator, Padre Manuel Rodrigues. It condemns Sebastião Fernandes, defendant, younger brother of Padre Manuel Rodrigues and João Rodrigues, to relinquish to the plaintiff both chapels, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence judging the donation of of the chapel of Gregório Lourenço and Maria Borges de Vasconcelos, his wife, to Misericórdia of Leiria as void and Antónia de Castro, plaintiff, as the rightful successor, because she is cousin and the closest relative of the last administrator, Inês da Cal. It condemns the Provedor and Irmãos of Misericórdia of Leiria, defendants, to relinquish the chapel, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence judging the plaintiffs, not named, as the rightful successors of the chapel of Constança de Aguiar, because the plaintiff is great-grandson of Joana da Silva, niece of the institutor, and condemning the defendants, not named, to relinquish to them the farmstead (herdade) of Benalfange, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo.
The court sentence also mentions the entail of António da Gama Nunes, but the defendant is absolved from this request, because he is the great-grandson of Nuno de Antas, cousin of the institutor and appointed by him.

Court sentence judging the plaintiff as the successor of the entail of Catarina Lopes, because he is older than the defendant and they are both cousins of the last administrator, Manuel Martins, who descends from the first administrator, Manuel Martins, the institutor's compadre. It condemns the defendant to relinquish the entail to the plaintiff, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence rejecting the plaintiffs, not named, as the rightful successors of the entail of António da Gama Nunes, and absolving the defendant from this request, because he is the great-grandson of Nuno de Antas, cousin of the institutor and appointed by him.
The court sentence also mentions the chapel of Constança de Aguiar, because one of the plaintifs is great-grandson of Joana da Silva, niece of the institutor, and condemns the defendants, not named, to relinquish them the farmstead (herdade) of Benalfange, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo

Court sentence (transcription) judging D. Maria de Sousa, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail founded by Iria Pires Barreto, who lived in Arco da Calheta, because she descends from António Francisco, uncle of Maria Tavares, the last administrator, by male bloodline and the lineage of António Francisco should succeed in the entail's administration after the extinction of the lineage of his sister, Isabel Gomes, mother of the last administrator. It condemns Feliciano Barreto, defendant, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail and its assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit. It also excludes the opponents from the succession.

Court sentence judging Belchior de Azevedo, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Padre Miguel de Mendonça and its assets, because he is cousin and the closest relative of Manuel de Mendonça, last administrator, according to the succession clauses of the institutor's codicil, which changed his will. It excludes Santa Casa da Misericórdia de Coina, plaintiff, and Maria das Neves de Mendonça, defendant, from the succession and condemns the defendant to relinquish to the opponent the chapel's assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence judging Manuel de Sousa da Silva, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Pedro de Sousa Alcoforado, with the obligation with the obligation to fulfil the conditions imposed in the institutor's will, such as established by Manuel de Sousa, natural son of the institutor, as a clergyman, because he is cousin of the institutor and was appointed by him to succeed to António de Sousa, last administrator, if he did not have children. It also judges that the leases' appointments belong to the plaintiff. It condemns Pedro de Fonseca de Castro, defendant and brother of António de Sousa, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Court sentence judging Inês de Freitas de Abreu, plaintiff, the rightful administrator of the entail of Aires Vasques and Maria Eanes, succeeding to her late cousin, Leonor da Fonseca, as her closest relative. The defendants, Álvaro Barreto da Silva, second cousin of Leonor da Fonseca, and his wife are condemned to relinquish the entailed estate to the plaintiff. It is mentioned that there is not foundation deed and that the female are not excluded from the succession.

Court sentence absolving Salvador Neto Arnaut, defendant, from the requested by the plaintiff, the late Luís de Sá Barreto, replaced by Francisco de Sá Miranda, his brother. The plaintiff argued that he is the rightful successor of the entail of Simão Cortês, vigário in the town of Crato, and accused the defendant of taking illegal possession of it, but he is not related with the last administrator, Sebastião Meireles, and is only related to the institutor by the line of Cortezes. It describes all the lineages involved in the entail succession.

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.

Court sentence, issued by the conservador of the Universidade of Évora, in a lawsuit between Miguel Pacheco Pimentel and D. Luísa Mesquita Pimentel, his wife, plaintiffs, against Jorge de Melo Coutinho, and his wife, and D. João Casco de Melo, and his wife, defendants, relating to the administration of the entail instituted by Gil Rodrigues de Vasconcelos. The judgment does not prove the plaintiff's allegations and recognizes the defendants as the legitimate owners of the entailed properties. Furthermore, both defendants have to determine which one of them should be responsible for the administration of the entail.

Court sentence of corregedor, judging a civil process between Catrina Dias, plaintiff, against Lopo de Araújo and Maria Boução, his wife, defendants.
The sentence states that the author was the daughter of Catarina Eanes, who was the daughter of João Álvares Boução, clergyman, and therefore unable to receive the administration of the chapel.
Also taking into account the previous sentences, the sentence absolves the defendants, condemning the plaintiff and the opponent at the expense of the process.
There follows another three sentences, confirming the previous.

Court sentence absolving António Correia Henriques, defendant, from the requested by Rui Gonçalves de Andrade, plaintiff, because he is the son of D. Ana, daughter of Isabel Fernandes and the heir of part of her available portion, bequeathed to found a chapel and entail. Although Rui Gonçalves de Andrade is the son of Isabel Fernandes, his mother determined in her will that, after the death of D. Ana, should succeed in her chapel and entail D. Ana's descendants.

Court sentence issued by Aires Gomes da Silva, regedor na Comarca and Correição de Entre Douro e Minho, judging a civil suit between João Gonçalves, plaintiff, against Lopo de Basto, his wife Maria Domingues and Gonçalo Eanes, defendants, concerning the limits and confrontations of the Quinta de Guilhamelo. The sentence states that the chapel had been instituted by Nuno Ribeiro, in 1435. The sentence condemns the defendants to deliver the property to the plaintiff, who is recognised as the closest descendant of the institutor and legitimate administrator of the chapel.

Court sentence handed down by doutor Álvaro Fernandes recognizing that the administration of João Rodrigues was legitimate, of the chapel established by João Rodrigues and Leonor de Almada. Leonor de Almada had been judicially removed from the administration and the closest relatives in the institution, who lived in Punhete, had resigned from the administration of the chapel.

Court sentence issued by the Corregedor of Angra on behalf of by João Dias do Carvalhal and sentencing him to enter on the administration of the entail founded by his parents Francisco Dias do Carvalhal and Catarina Neta, and condemning his brother-in-law Fernando Vaz Rodovalho, defendant, to give him the administration of all entailed properties, return the income derived from the years of unlawful possession and pay for the costs of the process.

Court sentence judging a civil process between padre António Pires, plaintiff, against defendants, on the possession of land belonging to the chapel established by Diogo Afonso, in Vale do Peso.
The sentence judges the chapel, in the absence of the institution, as a regular entail and the plaintiff as its legitimate administrator, condemning the defendants to surrender the entail.

Court sentence, issued by António Corvinel da Gama, corregedor, judging a civil process between D. António Alcáçova, plaintiff, against Gonçalo de Alcáçova, defendant, concerning the administration of the entail instituted by Rui de Carvalho. The opponents were D. Maria de Carvalho, D. Francisco de Azevedo, her husband, José de Lima and Bento de Carvalho.
The sentence acquits the defendant, recognizing him as the legitimate administrator of the entail, as he is the closest relative of the last administrator and descendant of the founder through male line. Condemns the plaintiff to return to the defendant the possession of the assets of the entail.
The documentary set contains moreover three acórdãos em relação, dated 1661-02-04, 1668-07-17 and 1674-08-11.

Court sentence issued by Diogo de Soveral, juíz ordinário of Sernancelhe, judging a civil process between João Luís and Domingas Lopes, authors, against Francisco Luís and Violante Afonso, defendants, on the administration of the chapel established by Pedro Afonso and Senhorinha Afonso .
The sentence approves the defendants' withdrawal, recognizing that the legitimate administration of the chapel belongs to João Luís, for being the oldest son of João Luís, brother of the defendant, and grandson of Luís Eanes, previous administrator. Condemns defendants to hand over the administration and property to the plaintiff.

Court sentence issued by Luís Gomes de Loureiro, Conservador of the University of Coimbra, judging a civil process of motion between Pedro Guedes de Proença and his wife, appellant, against António Guedes de Carvalho, a student at the University, his parents and family, appellees.
The sentence condemns the appellees to leave the administration to the appellant, considered a legitimate administrator, because the previous succession was made against the institution.

Acórdão do Desembargo judging that the leases belong to the appointee and ordering that the appealed sentence must go through the chancery.

Acórdão do Desembargo revoking a previous sentence of Juiz das Auções Novas da Relação e Casa do Porto, who judged António de Freitas do Amaral, opponent, as the rightful successor of the entail of Casa Nova do Basto, founded by Martinho Lourenço, and Padre Jerónimo de Amaral, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Quinta de Sezim, founded by Afonso Vasques Peixoto. It judges Fernando de Freitas de Mesquita, appellant, as the rightful successor of both entails, because he is simultaneously a legitimate descendant and the closest relative of the last administrator, while the opponent is a collateral relative and the plaintiff is a natural son.

Acórdão that revokes a previous sentence from Corregedor de Portalegre, judging the appellant's wife and defendant as the rightful successor of the chapel of Ana de Miranda, since she is the daughter of Manuel Vellez, collateral relative of the institutor. Since the defendant's father and the plaintiff are in the same degree of relationship it should succeed the male and his descendants.

Acórdão do Desembargo judging Maria Marques, opponent as the rightful succession of the entail of Padre António Marques, abbot of the church of Fiães, with masses in the chapel of Santo António, because she is the legitimate daughter of Miguel Sardinha, illegitimate son of the institutor, and, therefore, descendant by straight line from the institutor and not by collateral line like the other opponents. It condemns João de Sá de Miranda to relinquish to Maria Marques the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit until their return.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence from Juiz and Ouvidor, absolving Francisco Martins, defendant, from the request of Catarina Martins, plaintiff, and declaring him as the rightful successor of the chapel and entail of Domingos Vaz Amarelo, because he is the closest relative of the institutor and last administrator and the representation benefit does not apply in this case.

Acórdão do Desembargo revoking the previous sentence from Ouvidor da Comarca of Beja and the sentence of Juiz de Fora of Beja, which the first one confirmed. It absolves the defendant, not named, from relinquishing the assets of the entail of Manuel Correia Margalho to the plaintiff, not named, because he is the grandson of Manuel Dias Correia, collateral relative of the institutor and last administrator, so he is the entail's successor.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence from Corregedor da Corte, declaring that the assets of the entail founded by Cid António Salvago, in the farmstead (quinta) of Santo António de Pera Manca, near Évora, and amended by Baltasar Mendes dos Reis in his will belong to Luís Fernandes Lobo, plaintiff, son of Antónia Simões Correia and nephew of Baltasar Mendes dos Reis, because the defendant, José Botelho, is not relative to Francisco de Melo, last administrator, by his father's, Baltasar Mendes dos Reis, bloodline. It condemns the defendant to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially revoking the previous sentence from Juiz do Cível. It declares that it is not proven that the appellee and the appellants are from the institutor's bloodline, so none of the contenders has action to claim the chapel. Altought, it absolves the appelle (?) from the requested in the action and counterclaim and orders that he should keep the administration.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially confirming the previous sentence from Juiz de Fora of Castelo de Vide and absolving the defendants from the other request included in the plaintiffs' libel, regarding the ownership of some properties.

Acórdão do Desembargo confirming a previous sentence from Juiz de Fora with regard to the chapel of Manuel de Valadares and revoking it with regard to the entail of Doutor João de Valadares and Beatriz Lopes de Carvalho, his wife. It absolves the defendant, not named, and declares him as the rightful successor, since the plaintiff's mother was already deceased when Manuel de Valadares, the last administrator, died, and the defendant mother, the late Mariana de Valadares, was his closest relative and was from the institutors bloodline.

Acórdão do Desembargo ordering the fulfilment of a previous sentence of Desembargadores da Casa do Porto and declaring that the appellant should pay the income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão do Desembargo confirming a previous sentence from Juiz de Fora with regard to the chapel of Manuel de Valadares and revoking it with regard to the entail of Doutor João de Valadares and Beatriz Lopes de Carvalho, his wife. It absolves the defendant, not named, and declares him as the rightful successor, since the plaintiff's mother was already deceased when Manuel de Valadares, the last administrator, died, and the defendant mother, the late Mariana de Valadares, was his closest relative and was from the institutors bloodline.

Acórdão (transcription) by the Desembargo ordering the fulfilment of the previous sentence of Corregedor do Cível da Corte and declaring that the defendant is also forced to return to the plaintiff assets worth 2 000 réis of annual income, because João de Morais and his wife, Eugénia da Veiga, the defendant's mother, did not do it while they were administrators.

Acórdão that partially revokes the previous sentence, condemning the defendant, Gregório Mascarenhas Homem, as heir of his wife, D. Sebastiana da Câmara, to return to the plaintiff all movables of Afonso Garcia Tinoco or their price to buy properties to the entail of Afonso Garcia Tinoco. He is absolved from paying the money of the rescission of a wheat moio census paid by Domingos Cardoso and the value of the portions of Luís Mendes Barreto and Luís Gonçalves in the estate of Borras.

Acórdão ruling the first and second articles as proven and the fulfilment of the hindered sentence, regarding the estate and money returning by the defendants to the plaintiff.

Acórdão from Desembargo which revoke a previous sentence, judging the appellant, Francisco de Melo, as the rightful successor of the entail founded by Luís Melo Freire, in 1590, in Quinta de Nespereira, for his father's vested right. It also condemns the appellee, Francisco Soares de Melo, to relinquish the entail's properties to the appellant. The decision was made based on the description of the Freire family branch in question to distinguish it from other branches of the same name.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence from Desembargores da Relação do Porto, judging Baltasar Gomes, plaintiff, as successor of the entail of licenciado Baltasar Gomes, because he is male and nephew of the last administrator, Manuel Gomes, son of his brother, male and older than their sister, Maria Filipa, defendant. It excludes the defendant from the succession and condemns her to return the entail to the plaintiff, with the income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially confirming and partially revoking a previous sentence delivered from an unspecified judge, declaring that the entail founded by Cid António Salvago, in the farmstead (quinta) of Santo António de Pera Manca, near Évora, and amended by Baltasar Mendes dos Reis in his will belongs to Capitão António de Miranda Catela, opponent, because he is from the bloodline of Baltasar Mendes dos Reis and the closest relative of Francisco de Melo, the last administrator and son of Baltasar Mendes dos Reis. It condemns Benedita de Melo and her son-in-law, José Botelho, defendants, to relinquish the entailed assets to the opponent, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return. It also refers that Luís Fernandes Lobo and his wife, plaintiffs, do not have the right to succeed.

Acórdão do Desembargo that partially confirms a previous sentence from Desembargadores dos Agravos da Relação do Porto regarding the succession of the entail of António Carvalho and Maria Carvalho and partially revokes it regarding the defendants condemnation. Since the assets of António Mendes de Carvalho were already annexed to the entail, the defendants only should relinquish to Maria Fernandes, widow of António Carvalho, the original plaintiff, their income generated since the contested lawsuit until the death of António Carvalho and to João Pereira de Carvalho, the qualified plaintiff, their income generated since then until their return.

Acórdão ordering that the court liquidation should be decided by adjudicators, respecting the proceedings proof.

Acórdão do Desembargo revoking a previous sentence of Juiz das Auções Novas da Relação e Casa do Porto, who judged António de Freitas do Amaral, opponent, as the rightful successor of the entail of Casa Nova do Basto, founded by Martinho Lourenço, and Padre Jerónimo de Amaral, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Quinta de Sezim, founded by Afonso Vasques Peixoto. It judges Fernando de Freitas de Mesquita, appellant, as the rightful successor of both entails, because he is simultaneously a legitimate descendant and the closest relative of the last administrator, while the opponent is a collateral relative and the plaintiff is a natural son.

Acórdão that revokes a previous sentence from Corregedor das Ilhas, absolving Pedro Ribeiro Esmeraldo, defendant, from the requested by António de Carvalhal Esmeraldo, plaintiff, and ruling that the entail of João Esmeraldo, o Velho, and Águeda de Abreu, his wife, belongs to him, because he is the natural son of Francisco Gonçalves da Câmara, last administrator, and from his straight line and not collateral, like the plaintiff, his legitimate brother. It condemns the plaintiff to relinquish to the defendant the properties mentioned in the counterclaim, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return.

Acórdão do Desembargo partially confirming and partially revoking a previous sentence from Juiz de Fora of Santarém. It condemns the defendant to pay the income of the entailed assets generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão do Desembargo judging the plaintiff, not named, as the rightful successor of the entail founded, in 1501, by Fernando de Mesquita to his son, Diogo de Mesquita, with half of the farmsteads (herdades) of Sovereira, Valdobre and Perdigão, because she is grandniece of Diogo de Mesquita and his closest relative. Besides, her nephew, the successor of the other entail founded by Fernando de Mesquita to his other son, Álvaro de Mesquita, given up from the administration of the entail of Diogo de Mesquita. It condemns the prioress and religious of the monastery of Nossa Senhora do Paraíso of Évora, defendants, to relinquish to the plaintiff, the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence from Corregedor do Cível, absolving Diogo Gomes de Lemos, defendant, from the requested by Maria Correia Ferreira, plaintiff, and Joana Ferreira de Vilhena, religious in the monastery of Santa Ana of Viana, opponent, and judging him as the rightful successor of the entails of João Martins Ferreira and Pantaleão Ferreira, his son, because he descends from Inês Correia, daughter of João Martins Ferreira and sister of Pantaleão Ferreira. The plaintiff is excluded from the succession because it is not proven that Violante Correia, her ancestor, is daughter of João Martins Ferreira and sister of Pantaleão Ferreira. The opponent is excluded because she is a religious.

Acórdão do Desembargo confirming a previous sentence from Corregedor do Cível and declaring that the heir António Carvalho de Amorim should relinquish to the plaintiff the assets of António Mendes de Carvalho, last administrator, to annex to the entail of António Carvalho and Maria Carvalho.

Acórdão do Desembargo that confirms a previous sentence from Corregedor do Crime Conservador dos Privilegiados, judging the monastery of Vairão as the owner of the income generated since the contested lawsuit until the death of D. Isabel Barbosa, opponent and nun in that monastery.

Acórdão that, partially, confirms and, partially, revokes a previous sentence. It determins that the commanderies ownership issue belongs to Juízo das Ordens and judges D. Antónia de Meneses, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of her late brother, Diogo de Sousa, because she is his heir and closest relative. It condemns Manuel de Melo and D. Maria Francisca de Sousa, defendants, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail, with its income generated since the undue occupation until its return.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes the previous sentence from Juiz do Cível, absolving D. Joana Coutinho Côrte-Real, defendant, from the requested by D. Veríssimo de Lencastre, plaintiff, and declaring her as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Filipa da Silva, because she and her uncle, D. Luís Coutinho, are descendants from the first bloodline appointed by the institutor's and the plaintiff is descendant from the second.

Acórdão do Desembargo ordering the fulfilment of a previous sentence of Desembargadores da Casa do Porto and declaring that the appellant should pay the income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão em Relação judging the opponent, D. António da Silveira and his qualified son, D. Álvaro da Silveira, as the rightful successor of the entail of D. Fernando Coutinho, marechal do reino, located in Valverde dos Cavaleiros, Quinta da Pega and in the outskirts of Pinhel, because he is descendant of D. Beatriz Coutinho, daughter of the institutor, by her male son line, while Marquês de Távora, plaintiff, descends from her daughter. It condemns the Procurador da Fazenda and the defendant, excluded from the succession because she and her father are natural sons, altought she is the granddaughter of the last administrator, to relinquish the entailed assets to the opponent.

Acórdão em Relação condemning Maria Madalena, defendant, to relinquish the entail of Padre Francisco Dias, vigário of the parish of Esgueira, to Maria de Resende, plaintiff and the rightful successor, with the income generated since the contested lawsuit. It refers that the assets of Padre Francisco Dias were not divided by his heirs, that Pedro Godinho Barbosa, second administrator, founded a chapel in the church of Esgueira, and that the entail of Padre Francisco Dias was founded by collateral relatives.