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

474 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
this allegation, and, therefore, assuming the mental capacity of
Charles T. Ellicott, to dispose of his property, the deed must
operate upon it.
From these views, it follows, the plaintiffs have no title, and
their bill must be dismissed.]
S. TEACKLE WALLIS, JOHN GLENN, and REVERDY JOHNSON
for Complainants.
J. PENNINGTON, T. P. SCOTT, WM. SCHLEY for Defend-
ants.
[No appeal was taken in this case.
JOHN H. B. LATROBE ET AL.
vs. MARCH TERM, 1851.
WILLIAM H. TIERNAN ET AL.
[LACHES—POWERS AND DUTIES OF TRUSTEES.]
S. and 0. were in July, 1836, by agreement of parties, and with the consent of
the Chancellor, constituted trustees to receive and investipendentt lUe, a certain
sum of money detained in court by appeal. The money was paid to them
jointly, and they gave a joint receipt therefor, and loaned $ 5000, part there-
of, to T., who secured the same by a mortgage of certain real estate to S. and
G. jointly. The mortgagor paid interest from time to time to S., one of the
trustees, and in 1841, his executors, he having previously died, paid the en-
tire principal to S., and the mortgage was released by S. alone. The pay-
ments to S. were without the knowledge, privity or consent of G., who was
also ignorant of the release. The appeal was decided in 1838, but no appli-
cation was made for a distribution of the fund, by those entitled to it by
the decision on the appeal, until 1843, when a petition was filed, requiring
the trustees to account, and seeking to make G. responsible for the amount
received by S., and which he had misapplied. The court of appeals in 1845,
decided that G. was not responsible, for the reason, among others, of the de-
lay of the petitioners in asserting their claim, and it was not until 1848, ten
years after the decision on the appeal, and after the insolvency and death of S.,
that this bill was filed by the original petitioners or the parties representing
them, against the defendants, the executors of T., and their alienees, seeking

 
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 474   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