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 3, Page 267   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

HITCH VS. DAVIS.
Where no time is fixed by the wilt for the payment of a legacy, it will bear
interest from the expiration of one year after the death, of the testator.
[The allegations of the bill and answer, and the facts of
this case, will be found fully stated in the following opinions
of the Chancellor.]
THE CHANCELLOR:
In the case of Pennington, Adm'r of Patterson vs. James
0. Gittings, Executor of James Gittings, 2 G.& J., 208, one
of fhe questions raised and discussed in this case was examined
and decided by the Court of Appeals, and upon the principles
there settled, this case, so far as the same question is concerned,
must depend.
It was there decided that neither a donatio inter vivas or a
donatio mortis causa by mere parol was effectual. That in
either case a delivery of the thing intended to be given was
essential to the perfection of the gift, and that this delivery must
be according to the manner in which the particular thing, the
subject of the gift, is susceptible of being delivered; that there
must be a parting by the donor with the legal power and
dominion over it; If he retains the dominion—if there remain
to him a locus penitentice (which must be the case when he
retains the possession, and what is done is merely by parol),
there cannot be a perfect and legal donation; and that which
is not. a good and valid gift at law cannot be made good in
equity.
In that ease, the subject of the supposed gift was seventy-
five shares of stock in the Commercial and Farmers' Bank of
Baltimore, and the allegation of the bill (which allegation was
assumed by the Court to be established by the proof) was,
that the testator of the defendant gave and handed to the
complainant's intestate the certificate of the stock, entitling
the holder thereof to the number of shares mentioned in it,
at that time and in her presence endorsing his name on said
certificate, informing her (she being his daughter) that he gave
her the same to supply the loss of certain ground-rents which
he had previously given her.
It was insisted in that case, that by the delivery of the cer-

  		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 3, Page 267   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