| Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 463 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
UNION BANK VS. KERR AND GLENN. 468 an appeal therein, in the name of the bank, to the Court of Appeals. The bill prays, that the defendants, Kerr and Glenn, may be required to interplead and settle their rights to the said sum of $645 95, and to said notes, so that the bank may know to whom to pay and deliver over the same, and that said John D. Kerr, may be restrained by injunction from further proceedings in his said action of trover, and that said Glenn may also be restrained from commencing any action against the bank on ac- count of the notes in question, and for further relief. The bill then concludes with a prayer for an order of publication against said John D. Kerr, who is averred to be a non-resident of the state, and for process of subpoena against said Glenn. To this bill, the defendant, John D. Kerr, filed his answer on the 27th of September, 1849, in which, after admitting facts stated in the bill, as to their assignment to respondent, and no- tice thereof to the bank, and demand of said notes from the bank by respondent, and the institution of the actions of trover and assumpsit, he avers, that the said assignment was made to him by said Edward M. Kerr, for a bonafide and valuable con- sideration, that its validity was questioned in the said action of assumpsit, and after full argument was sustained by the ver- dict and judgment in that case which still remains unreversed. The answer also insists that the said Gill, neither as attorney of Potter, nor as receiver, as stated in the bill, had any rightful power or authority to interpose between the bank and respond- ent, as well because the subject of the assignment was not in any way partnership property, as also, because it was a fore- gone and past transaction, and had become the right of the respondent, even if in any sense it would have become consid- ered as partnership property, in case the same had been still the right of said Edward M. Kerr. That if at any time the bank could properly and successfully call upon the respondent to in- terplead with any person claiming adversely, such time was past and gone by, prior to the filing of this bill. That the sup- posed title of said Gill was utterly gone, by reason of a decis- ion of the Court of Appeals, reversing the order of the Chan- |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
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 463 View pdf image (33K) |
|
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.
Maryland State Archives