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 2, Page 15   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

MEWSHAW VS. MEWSHAW, 15
or account with the other parties for the profits, or pay them
anything in respect thereof. This allegation also is admitted
by the demurrer, and it is a concession certainly not calculated
to induce the court to look with indulgence upon a defence
which must delay the other parties in the assertion of their
rights.
In addition to the grounds of demurrer which have been
noticed, founded upon the impression that this was a proceed-
ing under the Act to direct descents, the objection is also made,
that the name of the land is not given—the bill being in that
respect blank.
There can be no doubt, that the title or claim of the plain-
tiffs to the aid of the court should be stated with reasonable
accuracy and clearness, and that if his case is set out in a vague
and indeterminate manner, a demurrer will be allowed. But
if the case be so stated as to apprise the opposite party of the
claim made against him, I apprehend that he would not be
permitted to object to the bill upon the ground of uncertainty y
though every particular circumstance is not stated. General
certainty, says Mr. Justice Story, is sufficient in pleadings in
Equity, and every minute particular need not be set out. Sto-
ry's Eq. PI., sections 253, 253.
Now in this case, though the name of the land is not given,
its location, quantity of acres, and its descent to Hazel Mew-
shaw (under whom the parties claim), on the part of his mo-
ther, Mary Mewshaw, are stated; so that, I apprehend, it can-
not be doubted that William Mewshaw, the party demurring;
and who is charged to be in possession, was perfectly well
apprised of the land referred to in the bill, and prayed to be
sold.
The demurrer, then, in my opinion, must be overruled, and
the defendant required to answer..
RANDALL for plaintiffs.
BOYLE for defendants.

  		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 2, Page 15   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  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives