Chancery: Tunaley vs Roch, April 27th 1857 (click here for details).

Prelude to the above case: Robert Tunaley, Constantia’s husband had died 1820 leaving a will that suggested or was interpreted as such by Constantia that all his estate would go to Constantia on the proviso that the 3 children by Robert’s second marriage to Constantia survived beyond the aged of 21 years.
All three children did survive and Constantia Tunaley in turn died 1854, leaving all her estate to her one daughter Constantia Maria Roch (nee Tunaley).
Constantia's will was confirmed London 7th April 1856.
Witnesses included Richard Barber, Clerk of Duffield, Derby .

This case was a challenge (Tunaley vs. Roch) to Constantia's will
The final court judgement opposed Constantia's will and asserted that all property should be shared equally between Robert's 3 children.
The judgement, based on the will of Robert Tunaley (deceased husband of Constantia) concluded that Robert had effectively left his property in Constantia's trust for the three children of his second marriage, namely Robert James Tunaley, Thomas Snape Tunaley and Constantia Maria Roch irrespective of the reference in Robert’s will to the 21 years survival.
As a result, property that consisted of 3 dwelling houses in Full Street (parish of all Saints) and one in the parish of St. Werburgh’s together with all outbuildings was to be split equally between Constantia Maria Roch, who by then was a widow, and Robert’s two other children.

Chancery: Tunaley vs Roch and Tunaley, August 5th 1857 (click here or on picture for details).

Prelude to the case:
This is a sequel to the case in April.
The above makes it clear that Thomas Snape Tunaley is already deceased. Thomas’s year of death is currently unknown although it would have been between 1852 and 1857 as he married Catherine Smith 1850 and they had a daughter Kathleen Constantia Tunaley born 1852.
It is also known that Thomas left a will and that, according to that will, his share of the property was to go in trust to his wife Catherine for the ultimate benefit of his daughter Kathleen Constantia.
The case also refers to “An Act to facilitate Leases and Sales of Settled Estates”.
The outcome of the case was that Thomas Snape’s will was accepted with permission given for the sale of the properties. Catherine was confirmed as executor of husband Thomas’s third share of the estate with proceeds to go into trust for the benefit of Catherine’s daughter, Kathleen Constantia Tunaley.

The reason for the dispute between Robert James and the other Tunaleys is not clear.
It is possible that Robert James Tunaley was arguing that Thomas Snape’s share of the estate should pass to the two survivors of the children of Constantia (Snape) Tunaley, that is Robert himself and Constantia Roch rather than Constantia’s daughter-in-law Catherine. If that were so, Constantia Roch would have been opposing such a view - not entirely surprising in view of the antipathy that would have been created between Constantia nad Robert as a result of the dispute leading to the first court case.
As regards the state of mind of Robert, it is noteworthy that in 1855, two years before these cases, he'd left his post as surgeon at Henstead following a number of scandals (click here).

P.H.T..