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

BARNUM VS. RABORG. 531
Upon these exceptions, the following opinion was deliver-
ed on the 7th of December, 1850.]
THE CHANCELLOR :
This case is submitted by consent, upon exceptions to the
report of the Auditor of the 18th of July last. The excep-
tions briefly, but very clearly, state the objections to the re-
port, and some suggestions have been made by the solicitor of
the parties interested in maintaining it.
The first exception relates to the allowance, by the Auditor,
of interest upon the claim of the complainants from the day of
sale, to the date of the affirmance by the Court of Appeals, of
the order of this court ratifying it. This is objected to, first,
upon the ground, that the complainants' remedy, if any, for
the loss occasioned by the delay consequent upon the appeal,
is, by a different proceeding, and personal against the defend-
ants. And, secondly, that if the complainants may resort to the
proceeds of sale, to indemnify them from this loss, it was not
proper in the Auditor to calculate interest upon the claim to the
day of sale, and interest upon the whole claim, as of that day,
to the date of the affirmance, by the Court of Appeals. In
other words, that the complainants' claim as it stood on the
day of sale, should not have been treated as principal, but the
interest should only have been charged, upon the original prin-
cipal debt.
With regard to this last objection, I consider it met and an-
swered, by the case of Ellicott vs. Ellicott, 6 Gill & Johns.; 35,
where it is said, that if the debtor's property be sold on credit,
to pay his debts, his creditors using due diligence in getting
their money from the trustee, on the day of its receipt by him,
would be getting not only simple interest on their debts from
their maturity, but interest compounded from the day of sale ;
and it seems to me very clear upon principle, that if the cred-
itor is precluded of this right by the act of the debtor, as for
instance, by appealing, as in this case, and filing an appeal bond,
that the rights of the former should not be prejudiced. The
debtor cannot be heard to say, that the claim of his creditor,

  		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 531   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