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

272 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
pleadings and proofs then in the cause, and such further proofs
as the parties might lay before him. The complainant excepted
to the report and accounts of the Auditor, made in obedience to
this order, upon certain grounds, which sufficiently appear
from the following opinion of the Chancellor, delivered at the
hearing thereof.]
THE CHANCELLOR:
This cause now comes up on exceptions to the Auditor's
report, made in pursuance of the order of the 9th of February,
1852, and the principal question raised, by the exceptions, and
discussed at the bar, relates to the liability of the defendant
Davis, as executor of Solomon Betts, to account for the note
of Lloyd N. Rogers, for $2,6.73 75, which matured and was
paid by the latter at the Chesapeake Bank, on the 20th of
November, 1843.
The original bill, which was filed in this cause in Baltimore
County Court, on the 18th of February, 1851, embraced and
sought to charge the defendant Davis, in respect of three
several items of claims, two of which were founded upon pro-
visions in the will of Solomon Betts, and one upon the ground
of a parol gift, alleged to have been made by him in his life-
time, to his daughter, the complainant Sarah, of the note of
Mr. Rogers.
The bill alleged, and the will of Mr. Betts proved, that he
devised a portion of his real estate to his said daughter, in
trust for her use during her life, and that he also directed the
sum of $5,000 to be invested in stock for her use, during the
same period, and that the defendant Davis, who was named
one of the executors and trustees, became by the renunciation .
of the parties associated with him in the trust, the sole execu-
tor and trustee.
And the bill further charged, that the testator was in his
lifetime seized of a lot of ground, lying contiguous to the real
estate which he so devised to his daughter in trust for life,
which lot of ground he had given to her, though no deed had
been executed therefor; and that with her consent, he sold

  		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 272   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