| Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 558 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
558 INDEX EQUITY— Continued. tween the assignor and the defendant,.a statement of the payments he had made the assignor on account thereof, afterwards discovering re- ceipts for further payments, not mentioned in the statement, he claimed a credit therefor. HELD— That the assignment to the complainant being made prior to the re- ceipt by him of the statement from the defendant, and he not be- ing induced to make the purchase by such statement, or lulled into false security by it, there could be no sufficient ground for deny- ing the defendant the benefit of the receipts. Hall vs. Purnell, 137. 5. If an innocent party is induced, by the obligor, to become the pur- chaser of a bond, against which there are equities, it is a deceit upon him, and he ought not to be subject to the same equity, to which the obligor was entitled against the obligee. J6. See PRACTICE IN CHANCERY. EQUITY OF REDEMPTION. See MORTGAGE, &c. 6, 7, 8. LIMITATIONS, 1, 2, 3. EVIDENCE. 1. The rule of evidence, that husband and wife cannot be witnesses for or against each other, is firmly established, and is founded partly, on identity of interest, and partly on that principle of public policy which seeks to prevent discord in families—a policy, of which no in- » vasion will be permitted, even after divorce. Bradford & Williams vs. Williams et al., I, 2. No case has been found, in which a husband has been so far regarded as agent for his wife, as that his declarations as agent can be received in evidence against her. Ib. 3. The rule which admits as evidence the admissions and declarations of an agent, like other rules, is subject to limitations. Such declara- tions must be made in the course of, and accompanying the transac- tion which is the subject of inquiry—but, when so made, they consti- tute a part of the res gestas, and are binding on the principal. Ib. 4. Declarations of an agent made after the transaction, though in relation to it, are no part of the res gestae, and are not binding on the principal, but come within the rule which excludes hearsay evidence. Ib. 5. The entries in the books of an agent, running over a long lapse of time cannot be used against a principal, without showing that they were made under circumstances which constitute them a part of the res ges- tas. Ih. 6. Where an answer explicitly denies the fact upon which the equity of the complainant's claim for relief rests, its weight and effect can only be overthrown by two witnesses, or one with pregnant circumstances. Rider vs. Riley, 16. 7. Upon a bill filed by an obligor in a sealed note against the executor of the obligee, the note was decreed to be cancelled, upon proof that the testator did not intend to exact payment of the money due upon it; but, originally intended it as a gift, or, afterwards, treated it as |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
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 558 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