clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 1, Page 266   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

266 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

that the application with regard to this payment can be success-
ful. Their agreement on the 24th of August, 1844, and the
papers signed by them, on the 2d of September, 1846, when
they themselves received $5,842 69, of this same money, seems
to me effectually to conclude them from objecting to the pay-
ment of the counsel.

But, it is said, that this payment to the counsel cannot prej-
udice the rights of Putney, because the agreement of the 24th
of August, 1844, under which it was paid, was not signed by
him.

It is to be recollected, however, that upon the record as it
stood on the 2d of September, 1846, the date of the payment,
German and Riddle, who did make the agreement with the
counsel, were the assignees of the claims of creditors to the
amount of $12,767 48, and, therefore, Green may have been
excusable in treating them as entitled to make any contract they
saw fit in regard to the fund.

I do not concur with the counsel for Putney in the position,
that under the assignment of November, 1842, to Putney and
Riddle the creditors transferred to them any and every sum
which might, or should be recovered from the United States.
On the contrary the assignment is expressly restricted to any
claim they might have upon the government, for losses sustain-
ed by them in the performance of their contract with the gov-
ernment; every other claim of the creditors founded upon the
deed to Green being reserved.

It does not distinctly appear upon what ground the sum now
in question was paid—whether it was paid as a further indem-
nity for losses, and if so, covered by the assignment of 1842,
or whether it was paid under the contract with the government,
by Putney and Green, and if so, not covered by the said assign-
ment, according to my understanding of it. The fifth report of
the trustee leaves this question in some doubt.

But, be this as it may, it is very certain the parties did not
treat the assignment of 1842 as absolute, and as transferring the
entire interest of the creditors to any sum which might be re-
covered from the government.



 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 1, Page 266   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives