Dyer, 309a. Thirdly, (which was the principal point of the case), it was agree per totam cur', that by the feoffment of the tenant for life, the remainder was destroyed; for every contingent remainder ought to vest, either during the particular estate, or at least eo instanti, that it determines; for if the particular estate, be ended, or determined in fact, or in law, before the contingency falls, the remainder is void. And in this case, inasmuch as by the feoffment of Robert, his estate for life was determined by a condition in law annexed to it, and cannot be revived afterwards by any possibility; for this reason the contingent remainder is destroyed, against the opinion of Gascoigne, in 7 Hen. 4, 23b. But if the tenant for life has been disseised, and died, yet the remainder is good, for there the particular estate doth remain in right, and might have been vested, as it is said in 32 Hen. 6. But it is otherwise in the case at bar, for by his feoffment no right of the particular estate doth remain. And it was said it was so agreed by Popham, Chief Justice, and divers justices in the argument of the case between Dillon and Friene, and denied by none. See II. R. 2. tit, Detinue, 46. And note the judgment of the book, and the reason thereof, which case there adjudged is a stronger case than the case at the bar. But note, reader, that after the feoffment, the estate for life to some purpose had continuance, for all leases, charges, etc., made by the tenant for life shall stand during his life, but the estate is supposed to continue as to those only who claim by the tenant before the forfeiture, but as to all others who do not claim by the tenant for life himself, the particular estate is determined; and by the better opinion, the warranty shall bind the remainder, although the warranty was created before the remainder attached or vested, and although the remainder was in the consideration of the law, and he who shall be bound by it, never could have avoided it by entry, or otherwise; yet forasmuch as the remainder did commence, and had its being by force of the devise, which was before the warranty, for this reason it shall bind the remainder; but the same was not unanimously agreed; and as the feoffment of the tenant for life shall destroy the remainder, which was in consideration of law, so, et a fortiori, the warranty of his ancestor, (by whom he is intended to be advanced) shall bind him. And in many cases one shall be bound, and barred of his right by a warranty, who could never have defeated it by any means, as in Edw. 44, 3, 30, and 44 Ass. p. 35. Lessee for life is disseised, to whom a collateral ancestor of the lessor releaseth, and dieth, he shall be barred. Vide, 3 Hen., 7, 9a, and 33 Hen. 8, Br. Guarantee, 84, a feme covert, who cannot enter nor avoid the warranty, shall be barred. So if the tenant for life, the remainder to the right heirs of J. S. had been disseised, and the disseisor had levied a fine at the common law, the right heir of J. S. shall be bound, and yet he could not enter nor make claim. But the point adjudged was, that by the feoffment of the tenant for life, the remainder was destroyed."