as to the person, though not in the name or surname, as when a father and son are  called by the same name and surname and the father is disseised; if the son impetrates  under the same name for the disseisin done the father he will not recover, because the  injuria was not done to him but to the father, and thus he will not have the plaint  but the father, had he lived, and though he has the same name and surname, he is a  different person, not him to whom the wrong was done.1 And so if a son called by the  same name as his father [is sued] for the disseisin and deed of his father after the  father's death. For a disseisin done to his father, [he may] aid himself, if he wishes, by  a writ of entry.2 There is an error in the action where one believed an action to lie  which did not lie.]3
Of error as to the person: the person himself or his office.
 That there may be fuller knowledge of the matters in connexion with which error  arises, it is clear that error is sometimes connected with the person (either the person  himself or his office), the thing or the action. With regard to the person, error occurs  in two ways, sometimes through the unskilfulness or negligence of the impetrator,  sometimes through the deceit of an adversary: the unskilfulness of the impetrator, as  where one calls another Peter, when he ought to call him Roger; because of an  error of that kind the writ falls, for many reasons; 4 <And so if a person has two names,  whether the error is in his proper name or his surname. 5 That name must be adopted  by which he is more frequently accustomed to be called, for names are given to things  to show the intention of him who speaks and we make use of speech as a servant.>6  and so if there is an error in the given name, the surname or the family name.7 So  if there is an error in the name of the species, as where one calls a thing clothing  when he ought to call it money.8 The deceit of an adversary, that is, when an adversary  deceitfully alters the possession, in the absence of the impetrator, so that  on his return, finding a new possessor, he cannot sue or implead him, there being no  mention made of him in the writ. [It seems that he cannot, because he is not named  in the writ and for many other reasons, but the truth is that he may and ought to  answer, otherwise, if he could not be sued, he who altered the possession could profit  from his wrongful act,9 and for many other reasons. Therefore both may be sued  together or each alone, even though the transfer is made before the writ comes to  the justices or the sheriff, provided there is diligent prosecution. And so if the thing  is transferred to another after judgment.]
Of error with respect to name and dignity
 There may be error as to an office or a dignity: [a dignity] as where one calls another  precentor instead of dean, or conversely, or deacon instead of priest, [but  not] conversely, since priest includes both dignities;10 as to an office, as where one  calls another coroner instead of sheriff, or conversely. The name of the dignity