Editing Edward Coke (section)

==Practice as a barrister==
[[File:Court of King's Bench.JPG|thumb|left|The [[Court of King's Bench (England)|Court of King's Bench]], where Coke brought his first case|alt=An image of a court in session. In the back sit five Justices in orange robes. In the centre is a table where scribes and court officials work. In the bottom section the public visits the court for hearings.]]

After being called to the Bar on 20 April 1578 Coke immediately began practising as a barrister. His first case was in the [[Court of King's Bench (England)|Court of King's Bench]] in 1581,<ref>{{Harvnb|Pound|2006|p=31}}</ref> and was known as ''Lord Cromwell's Case'' after the claimant, Lord Henry Cromwell, a landlord in Coke's home county of Norfolk. The case was a charge of slander against a Mr Denny, the Vicar of Northlinham and Coke's client. In a dispute with Denny, Cromwell had hired two unlicensed preachers to harass him, denounce the [[Book of Common Prayer]] and preach the gospel in his area. Denny retorted by telling Cromwell "you like not of me, since you like those that maintain sedition". Cromwell argued that Denny was guilty of ''[[scandalum magnatum]]'', slander against a peer of the realm because his statement implied that Cromwell himself was seditious or had seditious tendencies.<ref>{{Harvnb|Block|1929|p=51}}</ref>

The case was actually two actions, with the first judgement being given in Denny's favour after Coke's research found a flaw in the pleadings that invalidated Cromwell's case.<ref>{{Harvnb|Woolrych|1826|p=23}}</ref> His counsel had worked from an inaccurate English copy of the Latin statute of ''scandalum magnatum'' which had mistranslated several passages, forcing them to start the case anew.<ref name=b5>{{Harvnb|Boyer|2003|p=36}}</ref> After the case was restarted, Coke argued that Denny had commented on Cromwell's support of people attacking the Book of Common Prayer, and was not implying any deeper disloyalty.<ref name=block1>{{Harvnb|Block|1929|p=52}}</ref> The judge ruled that Denny's statement had indeed meant this, and from this position of strength Coke forced a settlement.<ref name=b5/> Coke was very proud of his actions in this case and later described it in his ''Reports'' as "an excellent point of learning in actions of slander".<ref name=block1/> The next year he was elected Reader of [[Lyon's Inn]] for three years,<ref>{{Harvnb|Woolrych|1826|p=24}}</ref> something surprising considering his young age and likely related to his conduct in ''Lord Cromwell's Case''.<ref name=block2>{{Harvnb|Block|1929|p=53}}</ref> As Reader he was tasked with reading to the students at the Inn, a group that numbered about thirty at any one time, and the quality of his readings increased his reputation even further.<ref name=block2/> His lectures were on the [[Statute of Uses]], and his reputation was such that when he retired to his house after an outbreak of the plague, "nine Benchers, forty barristers, and others of the Inn accompanied him a considerable distance on his journey" in order to talk to him.<ref>{{Harvnb|Block|1929|p=58}}</ref>

During the 1580s, Coke became intimately linked with the Howard family, the [[Duke of Norfolk|Dukes of Norfolk]] and Earls of Arundel. His uncle Thomas Gawdy had close links to [[Henry FitzAlan, 19th Earl of Arundel|Earl Arundel]] himself.<ref name=b6>{{Harvnb|Boyer|2003|p=37}}</ref> In Norfolk Arundel held a [[Liberty (division)|liberty]]&nbsp;– he was essentially a local prince who appointed all officials, maintained his own prison, executed justice and bribed any royal clerks.<ref name=b6/> His power base was his household, particularly the network of lawyers and stewards who held his estates together.<ref name=b6/> Coke's uncle Thomas Gawdy had served as Steward to the [[Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk|Third Duke of Norfolk]], and during the 1580s Coke was employed by the [[Duke of Norfolk|Howards]] to counter lawyers employed by the Crown, who argued that the Howards' lands were forfeit owing to the treason of the [[Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk|4th Duke]].<ref name=b7>{{Harvnb|Boyer|2003|p=38}}</ref> As well as defeating these direct attacks Coke travelled to [[Cardiff]] to answer a challenge by Francis Dacre, son of [[William Dacre, 3rd Baron Dacre]] and uncle-in-law to the 4th Duke's three sons, [[Philip Howard, 20th Earl of Arundel|Philip Howard]] and his two half-brothers, [[Thomas Howard, 1st Earl of Suffolk]] and [[Lord William Howard]]&nbsp;– he proved that Dacre's evidence was false and had the case dismissed.<ref name=b7/>

Coke became involved in the now classic ''[[Rule in Shelley's Case#History|Shelley's Case]]'' in 1581, which created [[Rule in Shelley's Case|a rule]] in [[real property]] that is still used in some [[common law]] jurisdictions today; the case also established Coke's reputation as an attorney and case reporter.<ref name=b9>{{Harvnb|Boyer|2003|p=115}}</ref> His next famous case was ''[[Cestui que#In re Chudleigh's Case|Chudleigh's Case]]'', a dispute over the interpretation of the Statute of Uses, followed by ''[[Slade's Case]]'', a dispute between the Common Pleas and King's Bench over ''[[assumpsit]]'' now regarded as a classic example of the friction between the two courts and the forward movement of contract law;<ref>{{Harvnb|Boyer|2003|pp=125–133}}</ref> Coke's argument in ''Slade's Case'' formed the first definition of [[Consideration in English law|consideration]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Sacks|2001|p=30}}</ref>