From the https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/6-argent-crayford

March 1638 - February 1639.

William Argent of Eastry, co. Kent, esq v William Crayford of London and Mongeham, co. Kent, gent.

Argent complained that around March 1636, at the "Pelican Inn" in Sandwich, Kent, at 'an ordinary where gentlemen meete' on a market-day Saturday, Crayford had insulted him by taking the place above him at the table and then declaring that 'I was a base fellow and no gentleman, and that none of my ancestors were gentlemen, and that he would prove me so whensoever he met me, that he would kill me or I him, and badd some or one present tell me so to my face.' Crayford was married to the daughter of Argent's wife, 'Lady Mary Nevinson' [sic], widow of Sir Roger Nevinson. In his defence he claimed to have been systematically vilified by 'Lady Mary' whilst staying in Argent's house at Eastry during his wife's pregnancy. 'Lady Mary' told him that 'he came sneaking up and down the country till she took him in and married her daughter to him', persistently called him 'Will foole' and tried to bar him from his wife's bedroom. About a month before the incident in Sandwich, Argent had assaulted him in the house, leaving him with a bloody nose. He therefore insisted that his action had been provoked, although Argent claimed in interrogatories for Ann Price in Crayford's counter suit that the local minister had reconciled this quarrel and the two men had 'received the sacrament of the Lord's Supper together.'

The commissioners, led by Sir Edward Boyes, took depositions on Argent's behalf at the "Dolphin Inn," Sandwich, on 17 May 1638, with the witnesses including Thomas Blechenden, esq, Edward Boyes, esq, and John Gookin, gent, all of whom, had been present at the original dinner. Depositions for the defence were taken at the "Chequer Inn," Canterbury, on 17 August 1638, with the commission led by Sir Edward Master and the witnesses including Argent's former butler and Mrs Crayford's nurse. The result of the case does not survive, but despite late efforts at arbitration, the sentence was ordered to be heard on 23 February 1639.