http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2015-04/1428744413
From: "Tompkins, Matthew (Dr.)"
Subject: RE: Lawsuit against Richard de Arundel, 11th Earl of Arundel??
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015

"In 1382, John Meryett, knight, and Elizabeth his wife, Richard Sergeaux, knight, and Philippa his wife and Robert d'Eyncourt, the son of Katherine, claimed that Richard, Earl of Arundel, had disseised them of a free tenement in Singleton, Sussex - Elizabeth, Philippa and Katherine (evidently deceased) being daughters of Edmund, son of Richard, late earl of Arundel [P.R.O. CP/40/487/503, transcribed with a translation in S.E. Thorne, ed., Year Books of Richard II: 6 Richard II, 1382-1383, pp.66-69 (1996)]."

http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cp/arundel.shtml

An image of the original record could probably be found on the Anglo-American Legal Tradition website.

A lawsuit brought against Edmund Arundel by his half-brother earl Richard complaining of his attempts to take possession of the manors in Essex which had been his mother's for life (JUST 1/270/11) can be found on A-ALT here:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no270/IMG_3768.htm

and in the following images (the commission of oyer et terminer is recited first, then the records of the 2 hearings begin in image 3770).

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2015-04/1428772349
From: Douglas Richardson
Subject: Re: Lawsuit against Richard de Arundel, 11th Earl of Arundel??
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015

The original lawsuit is dated Michaelmas term 1382, and it involves the co-heirs of Sir Edmund de Arundel [died c.1382]. It may be viewed at the following weblink:

http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT6/R2/CP40no487/487_1039.htm

Whereas the modern abstract refers to Sir Edmund as "Edmund, son of Richard, late earl of Arundel," the original lawsuit specifically refers to him as "Edmund de Arundell son of the said late earl."

Likewise the defendant is this case is styled "Richard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey" in the original lawsuit, not simply "Richard, Earl of Arundel" as in the modern abstract. The lawsuit includes another defendant, Thomas Chamberleyn, not mentioned in the abstract.

The lawsuit sets out the exact relationships of the plaintiffs to Sir Edmund: Elizabeth and Philippe are named as Edmund's daughters, and Robert Deincourt is named as his grandson, being the son of Edmund's daughter, Katherine.

Elizabeth's husband is named as "John de Meryet knight" in the lawsuit, not "Meryett" as given in the modern abstract.

I might also note that neither Edmund or his brother, Earl Richard, are called "Fitz Alan" in this lawsuit, principally because this surname was dropped by their grandfather in favor of the surname, Arundel, some decades previously.