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

CHILDSVS. SMITH. 483

ordered to stand over, with liberty to amend the bill to that
effect.

[The required amendment having been made, and some ad-
ditional testimony, (not materially varying the merits of the
case) having been filed, the case was again submitted to the
Chancellor, who thereupon passed a decree requiring Hayes to
convey the property in dispute to a new trustee, to be held by
the latter for the sole and separate use of the complainant—
subject to the mortgage debt of Mrs. Herbert; and said Hayes
was decreed to account with the new trustee for the profits of
the estate received by him, from the time it came into his pos-
session to the time of his delivering it up to the new trustee,
subject to such allowances as he might prove himself enti-
tled to.]

[The decree in this case was reversed upon appeal.]

J. D. CHILDS AND WIFE

vs. DECEMBER TERM, 1849.
LUCY M. SMITH.

[JURISDICTION—DOWER.]

IT is conclusively established, that a court of equity may interfere by injunc-
tion to prevent the commission of waste.

The objection to the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery to stay waste com-
mitted by a dowress on her dower lands, upon the ground, that the remedy
should be sought on the equity side of the County Court, where the proceed-
ings for partition were had, would apply with equal force to every appli-
cation to enjoin proceedings upon judgments and suits at law in the county
courts, and is, therefore, untenable.

The interest of the widow, is a continuation of the seizin of her husband; the
seizin of the heir being defeated ab uatw, the moment the certainty of the
estate to be held by her is ascertained by the assignment.

The commissioners divided an estate into eight parts, and assigned a third of
each division to the widow, as her dower, one lot consisted almost entirely
of wood, the others of arable lands. HELD—

That the widow was not bound to use each parcel, as if her husband had died
seized only .of the one lot to which such parcel belonged; but might take
from the wood lot, fuel and timber for the use of the cultivated lands.



 
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 483   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