an assise. Therefore [the jurors] are not subject to a conviction, because of the consent  of the parties, since they place themselves upon the jury freely, or of necessity lest  they be without defence.1 Such are, in the first place, the question of status, the causa  of succession, gift, a pact or agreement. Also uncertainty, that is, where certainty as  to the thing or tenement can in no way be reached; it is otherwise if it may be reached,  though with difficulty.2 Also consent or dissimulation, because the disseisee wished  to be disseised, whether that was so from the first or later.3 Also a settlement, because  the disseisee remitted the injuria and quit-claimed the tenement. Also confirmation  or consent, as where the disseisor gives the thing seized to another with the consent  of the disseisee and the disseisee confirms the gift, or ratifies it in some other way,  when it is first made or afterwards.4 Also usurpation by the disseisee of his own property  without judgment, after time has passed. Also difficulty in giving judgment,  that is, where the matter can in no way be decided by the justices; if it may in some  way be determined, though with difficulty, it is otherwise.5 Also res judicata, if a just  judgment has been given. Also a fine levied and a chirograph. Also intrusion into  another's property or a disseisin, if they are re-ejected at once. Also negligence which  in the course of time bars the action and the assise. There are some [exceptions] which  do not destroy the assise though they defer it for a time, as exceptions against the  writ and persons, as appears sufficiently from what has been said above. Thus we  must see how they fall into the assise and are determined by a jury, [those] as to  which nothing was said above. First of the exception of status, as where villeinage is  raised by way of an exception,6[as above more fully [in the portion] on exceptions  of villeinage.]
If the causa of succession falls into the assise.
 The causa of succession falls into the assise in this way. Suppose that the plaintiff  supports his claim and says that such an ancestor of his died seised of such a tenement  as of fee, and that he as his nearer heir put himself into seisin, and that he was in  seisin for so long a time until such a one wrongfully ejected him. The exception may  be made to this that the ancestor did not die seised as of fee, but held for life in some  way, or for a term or in gage, and that the plaintiff had nothing except by intrusion  and was at once ejected by the tenant who is the true lord (or the right heir, or the  chief lord), or that the plaintiff, though he might be the heir, put himself into seisin  over the chief lord, who had first seisin as chief lord, and that he intruded himself on  his seisin before it was clear whether