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 470   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

470 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

2 Bland, 362, 36 , said, that though the court when asked for
such an injunction, might look into the answer of the executor
or administrator and see what amount he admits to be in his
hands, or order him to make an affidavit of the amount, and to
bring the money into court, yet that it is not an absolute rule of
the court to refuse an injunction for want of such an affidavit.

It is also regarded as settled practice, that the power of this
court to grant injunctions to restrain creditors from proceeding
at law, after this court has passed a decree to account, and
thereby assumed the administration of the assets, is not con-
fined to cases in which the application for its interposition is
made by the executor or administrator; but, it extends to ap-
plications made by the heir or by another creditor, or a com-
mon legatee, or perhaps by a residuary legatee. 3 Daniel's
Ch. Prac.,1835.

It is therefore supposed, that the court has the power, at the
instance of the petitioners, E. H. Merrill and others, and in a
proper case would exercise it, to restrain a creditor from pro-
ceeding upon judgments against the administrator of the de-
ceased Alexander Harris.

[Having made these preliminary remarks, the Chancellor pro-
ceeded to state the nature of the case, after which he con-
tinued:]

It is believed that no case has been decided which would
justify the court in granting the relief asked for by this petition,
and that it is not warranted by any established principle of
law or equity.

I am not prepared to go to the extent of saying, that this
court may not, after the usual decree for an account, or quod
computet, in a creditor's suit against the executor, or after a
decree for the sale of the real estate upon such a bill—by
which the court assumes to itself the general administration of
the assets of the deceased debtor—compel a prior judgment
creditor to come in and share the fate of the other creditors,
when such prior judgment is de bonis testatoris simply.

In the case of .Lee vs. Park, 15 Eng. Cond. Ch. Rep., 715,



 
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 470   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  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives