Scenario?

[ElizabethHerts]

Could I please elicit opinions of the scenario that the following suggests?

Description:

Short title: Andrews v Marks.

Document type: Two bills and answer.

Plaintiffs: George Andrews of St Martin by Looe, Cornwall an infant (by Matthew Plummer, yeoman of Probus, Cornwall) and Matthew Plummer and Jenny Plummer his wife (who was widow of John Andrews, deceased and administratix of his will during minority of said George Andrews, their eldest son and his executor).

Defendants: Abell Marks and Catherine Marks his wife, George Andrew, the uncle, John Geash and John Burne.

Date of bill (or first document): 1734

I have both the Plummer and Andrew(s) family in my tree.

[kiterunner]

John Andrews wrote a will naming his eldest son George as his executor, but he died when George was still a minor and so unable to act as executor, so John's widow (George's mother) Jenny was appointed administrator instead. Jenny then married Matthew Plummer.

Then for some reason, presumably connected with John Andrews' will, they needed to sue all those other people. Maybe those people owed John Andrews money and hadn't paid it back to his estate?

[ElizabethHerts]

Thanks, Kate. It was what I originally thought, but then the part "an infant (by Matthew Plummer, yeoman of Probus, Cornwall)" was confusing me.

I'm still not sure what that bit intends to say.

Edit: Perhaps it means that Matthew Plummer is acting on George's behalf.

[kiterunner]

Thanks, Kate. It was what I originally thought, but then the part "an infant (by Matthew Plummer, yeoman of Probus, Cornwall)" was confusing me.

I'm still not sure what that bit intends to say.

Edit: Perhaps it means that Matthew Plummer is acting on George's behalf.

Yes, it means Matthew was representing George.

[ElizabethHerts]

Thanks, Kate. I feel happier about it now.