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

330 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
regard to those exceptions, reserving that question until the
case shall be brought before him for decision upon its merits.
The bill was filed on the 8th of May, and on the same day,
the Baltimore County Court passed an order directing the writ
of M exeat to issue, and that the sheriff should detain the de-
fendant in his custody, until he shall give bond, with surety,
to be approved by the sheriff, in the penalty of five thous-
and dollars, conditioned to abide by, conform to, and fulfil
the requirements of all decrees which the court may pass in
the cause. The prayer for the writ of ne exeat was founded
upon the averment "that the said Josiah Bayley is about to
leave the state of Maryland, and depart beyond the jurisdiction
of this court."
On the 13th of May, Baltimore County Court overruled a
motion to discharge the defendant from the writ, and to quash
the same, upon the ground that the defendant is, and was a
resident and inhabitant of Dorchester county, in this state, it
appearing by the order, that evidence was heard by the court
upon the question submitted to it upon this motion, and on the
same day, as appears by the sheriff's return upon the writ, and
the receipt of the warden of the jail, the defendant was placed
in custody,,
After the passing of the above orders, the defendant filed his
answer, in which, after denying many of the allegations of the
bill, the defendant says, "that he is not about to leave the state
of Maryland, or to depart beyond the jurisdiction of her courts,
and has no such purpose or intention." And subsequently
upon his petition, the papers and proceedings were ordered to
be transmitted to this court, and being here, an order was ob-
tained on the 19th of May, that the motion to discharge the
writ of ne exeat., would be heard on the 29th of the same month,
upon notice being served upon the opposite party.
Notice was given accordingly, and counsel have been heard
for and against the motion. When the orders of Baltimore
County Court were passed, the answer was not filed, and of
course, that court has pronounced no opinion upon the effect
which that answer should have upon the question now to be

  		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 330   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