Royal sentence published by request of Bernardo de Faria, defendant, who was judged, with his wife, D. Beatriz de Melo, as the rightful successor and administrator of the entail founded by Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro. By this sentence, king Pedro II orders the fulfilment of a previous sentence regarding the administration of the entail of Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, claimed by D. Francisco Castelo Branco Coutinho Castro e Meneses, conde do Redondo, and D. Madalena de Castro, his wife, plaintiffs, againts the defendants.

Royal sentence published by request of Bernardo de Faria, defendant, who was judged, with his wife, D. Beatriz de Melo, as the rightful successor and administrator of the entail founded by Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro. By this sentence, king Pedro II orders the fulfilment of a previous sentence regarding the administration of the entail of Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, claimed by D. Francisco Castelo Branco Coutinho Castro e Meneses, conde do Redondo, and D. Madalena de Castro, his wife, plaintiffs, againts the defendants.
Followed by a dispatch orderting its fulfilment, dated from 1674-07-03.

Royal sentence issued by Casa da Suplicação, declining the appeal made on behalf of the minor Martinho Afonso de Melo, defendant and appellant, against a sentence issued by the Juiz dos Órfãos de Lisboa, Francisco Ferreira Encerrabodes on the cause that opposed him, defendand and D. Maria da Silva de Almeida, plaintiff, regarding the succession on the administration of the entail and chapel of Espírito Santo, in the church of the Misericórdia de Lisboa, founded by Luís de Almeida e Vasconcelos. The Casa de Suplicação condemned the minor Martinho Afonso de Melo and his tutors to pay for the costs of the process and deliver the administration of the entail and of the entailed properties with all of it's derived income to D. Maria da Silva.

[includes several documents, including sentences, statement of oath, termo de curador, extracts of the will and a termo de atempação].

Petition of Manuel Álvares Pegas addressed to the king, requesting the revision of a previous sentence, pronounced by the ordinary judge of Lanhoso, that had excluded Domingos da Costa de Mesquita from the succession of the entail of Francisco da Costa de Mesquita.

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 absolving Francisco de Sá e Meneses, marquês de Fontes, and wis wife, D. Joana de Lencastre, marquesa de Fontes, defendants, from the requested by João Rodrigues de Sá e Meneses, plaintiff, and declaring the defendant as the rightful successor of the entails of Pedro de Sá, his father and grandfather and Diogo de Sá, his brother, all administrated by a single person. The plaintiff is excluded from the succession because he is the son of Constatino de Sá, natural son of Martinho Lourenço de Sá, and the natural sons are excluded, unless they are expressly appointed.

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 judging Páscoa Lopes, plaintiff, as the successor of the chapel of Francisco Lopes Moreno, located in the monastery of São Domingos of Abrantes, because she is the natural daughter and heir of João Lopes Moreno, the institutor's son. Her father and grandfather are from a low social status (peão), so the natural children are equally admited to their father's inheritance. It condemns the defendants to relinquish the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit until their return.

Court sentence absolving Sebastião da Fonseca Falcão Boto, defendant, who owns the chapel of Espírito Santo, founded by Gonçalo Boto, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, from the requested by Diogo de Aguiar Boto and Maria Fernandes, his wife, plaintiffs, and Josefa Fragosa Boto, Rui Mendes de Vasconcelos Boto, D. Joana de Lacerda Boto and Doutor António de Brito de Lacerda, opponents, all claiming the chapel's succession. It refers that Josefa Fragosa Boto can not succeed because she is the daughter of an ilegitimate daughter of António Fragoso, and the plaintiffs and other opponents did not prove what they claim in their libels of accusation.

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 absolving Domingos Soares Barbosa, plaintiff, from the requested by António Soares de Melo, defendant, and confirming him as the rightful successor of the entail of doutor Pedro Barbosa, Doutor Gaspar, his brother, and D. Leonor Soares, his wife, because the natural and illegitimate children are not excluded from the succession. The defendant claims the right to succeed as grandson and heir of Miguel de Vasconcelos, killed on the day of the acclamation of D. João IV, who took possession of the entail after the death of Manuel Soares de Barbosa.

Court sentence judging Jácome Carneiro de Barros, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Francisco Fernandes Monteiro and condemning Manuel Correia de Lacerda, defendant and natural son of Fernando Correia de Lacerda, the institutor's grandson, to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit until the final sentence, because the entail was founded by a nobleman and the natural sons are excluded from the succession, altought the foundation deed does not specify that clause. Excluded the defendant, the plaintiff is the closest relative of the institutor.

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 (transcription) judging Nuno Gonçalves Perestrelo, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entails of Brásia Nunes and her daughter, D. Beatriz de Óbidos, and condemning the defendant, António Perestrelo, to relinquish the properties entailed to them from then onwards. António Perestrelo had succeded to his father, João Lopes Perestrelo, but he confessed that he had no right to the entails because he was a natural son, although legitimated by the king, and was thus excluded from the succession according to the institutor's will.
D. Beatriz de Óbidos had received an entailed estate in Torrão from her mother, Brásia Nunes, as her dowry when she married Aires de Miranda de Figueiredo. She had, however, died before her mother, and bequeathed her an entail with an obligation of 5 000 réis of masses in the convent of S. Bento de Xabregas. After Brásia Nunes died, the entails had passed to Beatriz's son, Heitor de Miranda, and then to Beatriz's sister, Catarina Nunes, who bequeathed them to Maria da Costa. They then passed to João Lopes Perestrelo, uncle of the plaintiff and father of the defendant.

Court sentence judging the plaintiff, not named, sister of António Segurado de Barbuda, last administrator, as the rightful successor of the entail of padre Nicolau Martins Segurado and excluding Vicente Segurado, defendant, natural and legitimated son of António Segurado de Barbuda, because the natural and illegitimate children are excluded from the succession. It condemns the defendant to relinquish to sargento-mor João de Figueiredo e Nápoles and his wife, plaintiffs, the entailed assets, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return.

Court sentence judging Manuel de Leiva Camelo, defendant, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Simão Camelo Pereira, in the monastery of Nossa Senhora das Virtudes, and absolving him from the requested by Francisco Camelo Pereira, plaintiff. The defendant succeed in the chapel's administration as brother of the last administrator and father of the plaintiff. The plaintiff can not succeed because he is a legitimated natural son and the institutor did not appointed natural children as successors, so they are excluded.

Court sentence judging Manuel Carneiro, minor, plaintiff with his mother, Antónia Soares, his tutor, as the rightful successor of the entail and chapel of Padre Manuel da Veiga, because he is the son of the late Paulo Carneiro, first born child of Manuel Carneiro da Veiga, last administrator, and condemning Manuel de Vilalobos, defendant, to relinquish to him the entail and its assets, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit. The defendant took possession of the entail after the death of Manuel Carneiro, his grandfather, taking advantage of the absence of Paulo Carneiro and accusing him of not being married to the plaintiff's mother, so Manuel Carneiro is illegitimate, and of being sentenced to death. It is proven that these accusations are not valid.

Court sentence judging João Coelho Aranha, opponent and son of a second son of Lourenço de Lafeta, first administrator, as the rightful successor of the entail of Cosme de Lafeta and its assets, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return. It excludes the plaintiff, D. Catarina Eugénia Teles, widow of Otávio de Lafeta, last administrator, and the defendant, João de Lafeta, because he is a natural son of the mentioned Otávio de Lafeta. The improvements made by Otávio de Lafeta must be paid to his widow.

Court sentence condemning the prior and religious of the monastery of Tomar, defendants, to relinquish the properties of the entail of Fernando da Fonseca, located in Ribeira de Moinhos and Rio Novo, in Montemor-o-Velho, with their income generated since the contested lawsuit, to António da Fonseca, plaintiff. António da Fonseca is the rightful successor of the entail, because he is a descendant of Fernando da Fonseca, the institutor's illegitimate son and the second appointed administrator, while Padre Frei Lucas descends from Diogo da Fonseca, a legitimate son of the institutor, but the third appointed by him to succeed in the entail.

Court sentence (transcription) judging Nuno Gonçalves Perestrelo, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entails of Brásia Nunes and her daughter, D. Beatriz de Óbidos, and condemning the defendant, António Perestrelo, to relinquish the properties entailed to them from then onwards. António Perestrelo had succeded to his father, João Lopes Perestrelo, but he confessed that he had no right to the entails because he was a natural son, although legitimated by the king, and was thus excluded from the succession according to the institutor's will.
D. Beatriz de Óbidos had received an entailed estate in Torrão from her mother, Brásia Nunes, as her dowry when she married Aires de Miranda de Figueiredo. She had, however, died before her mother, and bequeathed her an entail with an obligation of 5 000 réis of masses in the convent of S. Bento de Xabregas. After Brásia Nunes died, the entails had passed to Beatriz's son, Heitor de Miranda, and then to Beatriz's sister, Catarina Nunes, who bequeathed them to Maria da Costa. They then passed to João Lopes Perestrelo, uncle of the plaintiff and father of the defendant.

Court sentence judging Máximo de Melo de Albuquerque, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of cónego Rodrigo Esteves Fialho, because he is the nephew of cónego Vicente Borges, the last administrator, and great-grandson of Branca Esteves, daughter of the institutor and appointed in the absence of her brother's descendants. Padre Frei António da Silva, opponent, and Diogo Borges da Silva, brothers and natural sons of cónego Vicente Borges, can not succeed because the illegitimate and natural sons are excluded from the succession. It condemns the defendant to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail, with its income generated since the undue occupation. The improvements made by the defendant's father belong to the defendant.

Court sentence judging Maria Correia Furtado, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Baltasar Quaresma, chantre of the cathedral of Faro, because she is the closest relative of the institutor and Manuel Ferreira, defendant, is an illegitimate and adulterine son of Sargento-mor João Ferreira de Almeida, last administrator. It also excludes Manuel Homem, opponent, a more distant relative of the institutor. It condemnd the defendant to relinquish the chapel's assets to the plaintiff.

Court sentence proving the foundation of the chapel of Francisco Faleiro and declaring D. Luísa de Meneses, plaintiff with her husband, Manuel de Almeida, as its rightful successor, because she is a natural and legitimated daughter of Jorge da Fonseca de Meneses, last administrator. It judges that the income of one moio of wheat imposed in the farmstead (herdade) of Aldeia das Três, in the outskirts of Beja, belongs to the chapel and condemns João de Aboim Pessanha, defendant, to relinquish it to the plaintiff, with its income since the death of Jorge da Fonseca de Meneses.

Court sentence absolving Francisco de Sá e Meneses, marquês de Fontes, and wis wife, D. Joana de Lencastre, marquesa de Fontes, defendants, from the requested by João Rodrigues de Sá e Meneses, plaintiff, and declaring the defendant as the rightful successor of the entails of Pedro de Sá, his father and grandfather and Diogo de Sá, his brother, all administrated by a single person. The plaintiff is excluded from the succession because he is the son of Constatino de Sá, natural son of Martinho Lourenço de Sá, and the natural sons are excluded, unless they are expressly appointed.

Court sentence issued by the Juiz dos Órfãos de Lisboa, Francisco Ferreira Encerrabodes, condemning the defendant Martinho Afonso de Melo to relinquish and give the administration of the entail and chapel founded by Luís de Almeida de Vasconcelos to the plaintiff, D. Maria da Silva de Almeida, alongside with all the entailed properties and the revenue derived from them, from the time he unlawfully entered on the administration to the present, he was also sentenced to pay for the costs of the process. The sentence was issued based on the papers presented by both parties involved, but specially on the fact that Martinho Afonso de Melo was a natural and legitimized son of Martinho Afonso de Melo, who died while the last administrator, D. Luísa da Silva, was still alive. Therefore, D. Maria da Silva, aunt of the defendant, as legitimate daughter, should have the preference on the succession.

Court sentence issued by licenciado Francisco Monteiro de Miranda, juiz de fora in Elvas, absolving Bernardo de Faria and D. Beatriz de Melo, his wife, defendants, from the request of the plaintiffs, D. Francisco Castelo Branco Coutinho Castro e Meneses, conde do Redondo, and D. Madalena de Castro, his wife, and judging them as the righful successors in the entail of Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, because the defendat's grandmother, D. Francisca de Melo, was the daughter of Martinho Afonso de Melo Pereira, the fourth appointee by Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, and the entail foundation deed accepted illegitimate offspring to succeed in the entail's administration.

Court sentence issued by licenciado Francisco Monteiro de Miranda, juiz de fora in Elvas, absolving Bernardo de Faria and D. Beatriz de Melo, his wife, defendants, from the request of the plaintiffs, D. Francisco Castelo Branco Coutinho Castro e Meneses, conde do Redondo, and D. Madalena de Castro, his wife, and judging them as the righful successors in the entail of Garcia de Melo, Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, because the defendat's grandmother, D. Francisca de Melo, was the daughter of Martinho Afonso de Melo Pereira, the fourth appointee by Heitor de Melo and D. Maria de Castro, and the entail foundation deed accepted illegitimate offspring to succeed in the entail's administration.

Court sentence of Relação pronounced by Agostinho da Câmara de Vilas Boas, corregedor da corte, condemning the defendant, Diogo Gomes Pereira, to relinquish to the plaintiff, Martinho Vaz Castelo Branco the entail and chapel of Quinta da Azenha Pobre, because his father was an illegitimate son and the institutors excluded the illegitimate offspring from the entail's succession.

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 judging Domingos Soares Barbosa, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Doutor Pedro Barbosa, Doutor Gaspar, his brother, and D. Leonor Soares, his wife, because he is the natural son of Manuel Soares Barbosa, the first administrator, and the natural and illegitimate children are not excluded from the succession. Jerónimo de Scacia de Castro, defendant, is condemned to relinquish to the plaintiff the entailed properties, with their income, which he received from Miguel de Vasconcelos, who took possession of the entail after the death of Manuel Soares Barbosa.

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 from the Desembargo revoking the previous sentences of the judge and ouvidor, which ruled Francisco da Costa de Mesquita as rightful successor of the entail of Francisco da Costa de Mesquita and ordered the defendant, Domingos da Costa de Mesquita, to relinquish the entailed properties. Although Domingos da Costa de Mesquita is a natural and legitimated son of the last administrator, Jorge da Costa de Mesquita, is excluded from the succession because there is a legitimate descendant of the institutor, his cousin and plaintiff, Francisco da Costa de Mesquita.

Acórdão do Desembargo ordering the fulfilment of the sentence delivered by Corregedor do Cível and condemning Manuel Correia de Lacerda, defendant, to pay the two parts in both instances and Jácome Carneiro de Barros, plaintiff, to pay the third part. It refers that the defendant was absolved from relinquish the assets of the requested leases (prazos) and chapels of Maria Baltasar and Marquesa Antónia.

Acórdão (transcription) by the Desembargo confirming that the properties referred to in the previous sentence were indeed an entail and absolving the defendant, António Perestrelo, who is judged the rightful successor of Brásia Nunes' entail, since she hadn't expressly excluded natural children from the succession. The clause referring the illegitimate exclusion only concerns the ancestors and descendants and not the collateral relatives.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence delivered from Juiz de Fora de Évora, condemning the defendant, not named, to relinquish the entail and chapel of Gonçalo Boto, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit, to Martinho Pais de Melo, plaintiff and relative to the institutor, judged as its rightful successor. It also absolves the plaintiff from relinquish the entail and chapel of Catarina Boto to the defendant, as requested in the counterclaim. It is proven that the defendant is the daughter of Isabel Fragosa, natural daughter of António Fragoso, and that the natural sons and their descendants are excluded from the succession.

Acórdão (transcription) by the Desembargo confirming that the properties referred to in the previous sentence were indeed an entail and absolving the defendant, António Perestrelo, who is judged the rightful successor of Brásia Nunes' entail, since she hadn't expressly excluded natural children from the succession. The clause referring the illegitimate exclusion only concerns the ancestors and descendants and not the collateral relatives.

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 that revokes a previous sentence delivered from Juiz de Fora de Évora, condemning the defendant, not named, to relinquish the entail and chapel of Gonçalo Boto, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit, to Martinho Pais de Melo, plaintiff and relative to the institutor, judged as its rightful successor. It also absolves the plaintiff from relinquish the entail and chapel of Catarina Boto to the defendant, as requested in the counterclaim. It is proven that the defendant is the daughter of Isabel Fragosa, natural daughter of António Fragoso, and that the natural sons and their descendants are excluded from the succession.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence delivered from an unspecified judge, judging Nuno Barreto, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the entail of Catarina Rodrigues and Isabel Rodrigues, because D. Ana Maria Magalhães, defendant, is a natural daughter of João Baião de Magalhães, the last administrator. It is proven that the plaintiff is the grandson of Fernando Nunes Barreto, appointed to succeed in the entail's administration after the extinction of Francisco Baião's lineage. It condemns the defendant to relinquish to the plaintiff the entail, with its income generated since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão partially confirming and partially revoking the previous sentence. It condemns Diogo Borges da Silva, defendant, to only pay the income generated since the contested lawsuit, because he had valid arguments to believe that the entail belonged to him.

Acórdão do Desembargo that partially confirms and partially revokes a previous sentence, declaring Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Espírito Santo, founded by Gonçalo Boto, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, because the illegitimate children and their descendants can succeed in the absence of legitimate relatives. It condemns the defendants to relinquish the chapel's assets to the opponent, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return.

Acórdão do Desembargo that revokes a previous sentence delivered from an unspecified judge, absolving the defendants, not named, from the requested by the plaintiff, not named, to relinquish the assets of the entail of Pedro de Amorim Pereira and Isabel de Almeida, his wife. It declares that the right of the plaintiff to succeed in the entail is weak and that the succession belongs to the appellant, the legitimated daughter of Cristóvão Pereira.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

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 from Desembargo revoking a previous sentence from Corregedor, absolving the defendants from the requested by the plaintiff, because this one does not prove that he is from the institutor's bloodline and in the foundation deed it is not included the illegitimate exclusion.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

Acórdão em Relação judging João, plaintiff with his grandfather, Manuel Fernandes, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Padre Gaspar Carvalho Pais and Susana Dias, and excluding the defendant, not named, because she is an illegitimate daughter of Nuno Pais, the last administrator of the first chapel. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to the plaintiff the assets of the chapel of Padre Gaspar Carvalho Pais, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return, and it annuls the donation of the chapel of Susana Dias made by Isabel da Assunção, nun in Convento de Ferreira and last administrator, to the defendants.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

Acórdão em relação (transcription) revoking the sentence by the desembargadores dos Agravos da Casa da Suplicação in favour of António Perestrelo, defendant, because his legitimation wasn't valid. He is ordered to return the properties of the entails of Brásia Nunes and D. Beatriz de Óbidos to Nuno Gonçalves Perestrelo, plaintiff, who was the rightful successor.

Acórdão em relação (transcription) revoking the sentence by the desembargadores dos Agravos da Casa da Suplicação in favour of António Perestrelo, defendant, because his legitimation wasn't valid. He is ordered to return the properties of the entails of Brásia Nunes and D. Beatriz de Óbidos to Nuno Gonçalves Perestrelo, plaintiff, who was the rightful successor.

Acórdão em Relação judging Isabel Pereira, plaintiff, as the rightful successor of the chapel of Inácio de Bettencourt, in the monastery of Basto, because she is the legitimate and only daughter of the last administrator, Simão Barroso, also judged in a sentence as the rightful successor. It condemns João Rebelo Leite, defendant, who argues that he is the closest relative of the institutor, to relinquish the chapel's administration, with its income since the contested lawsuit.

Acórdão em Relação judging João, plaintiff with his grandfather, Manuel Fernandes, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Padre Gaspar Carvalho Pais and Susana Dias, and excluding the defendant, not named, because she is an illegitimate daughter of Nuno Pais, the last administrator of the first chapel. It condemns the defendants to relinquish to the plaintiff the assets of the chapel of Padre Gaspar Carvalho Pais, with their income generated since the undue occupation until their return, and it annuls the donation of the chapel of Susana Dias made by Isabel da Assunção, nun in Convento de Ferreira and last administrator, to the defendants.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

Acórdão em Relação judging Josefa Fragoso Boto, opponent, as the rightful successor of the chapels of Diogo Boto, in the farmstead (herdade) of Zambujeiro, in the parish of Nossa Senhora do Escourão, in the outskirts of Montemor-o-Novo, Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho, in the church of S. Domingos of Évora, Teresa da Silveira, in the chapter of the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, in the monastery of S. Domingos of Évora, and in the farmstead (herdade) of Silveira, in the outskirts of Redondo, and Miguel Pegas, in the monastery of S. Francisco of Évora, all denounced as vacant to the Crown by the late José da Costa Castelo Branco, the original plaintiff, because she is the daughter of a natural daughter of António Fragoso and niece of Álvaro de Ataíde, the last and legitimate administrators, and because there is not legitimate relatives of the institutors. It condemns the children of António Correia Pereira and D. Filipa de Melo, defendants, to relinquish the chapels to the opponent, with their income generated since the opposition, and judges the chapels as absolutas and not vacant to the Crown.
It is mentioned that Diogo Boto had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-08-20 and had bequeathed it to his brother, André Boto, and afterwards to his cousin, João Boto, father of D. Teresa da Silveira. Henrique Mendes Casco and Maria Mouzinho had founded their chapel in a dowry deed to their niece, D. Teresa da Silveira, daughter of João Boto da Silveira and Margarida Vaz Pegas, dated 1584-07-17. D. Teresa da Silveira had founded three chapels in her will, made in 1621-12-12, the first one for her nephew António Fragoso de Ataíde, the second one for her niece D. Constança Lobo and the third one for her nephew Rui Lopes da Silveira. Miguel Pegas had founded his chapel in a will made in 1530-04-08 and had bequeathed it to his uncle, cónego João Rodrigues, and after his death to his cousin, Lucas Rodrigues, and to his descendants.

Acórdão em relação ordering to make the tombo and put an inscription on the church. The chapel belongs to the Crown since 1450. The future administrators will have the tombo in a book and will fulfill the pious obligations.

Acórdão em Relação confirming the court sentence issued by juiz de fora in Elvas and condemning the plaintiffs to pay the lawsuit expenses.

Acórdão em Relação ordering the sentence hindered (embargada) by the appelant, D. Francisco Castelo Branco Coutinho Castro e Meneses, conde do Redondo, to be registered in the chancery and condemning the appellant to pay the lawsuit expenses.

Acórdão em relação condemning the defendant Francisco Ribeiro due to the accusation presented by the Procurador da Coroa, plaintiff. Since the defendant doesn't have the entail foundation deed nor the tombo, and considering that Catarina Ribeiro was unable to administrate this chapel for being daughter of a clergyman, the chapel is vacant in favour of the Crown. Therefore, the defendant must drop the chapel as well as the income obtained since the begining of the legal action. It must be imposed a sequestration to all the assets that belong to the chapel.

Acórdão em relação ordering the fulfillment of the previous acórdão em relação because the motion is not accepted.

Acórdão em Relação confirming the court sentence issued by juiz de fora in Elvas and condemning the plaintiffs to pay the lawsuit expenses.