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

418 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
that estate was conveyed for that sum, and as Basil D. Spald-
ing's interest was one-third, I see no insuperable objection to
giving him the benefit of the vendor's lien for that proportion,
say $1,666 662/3.
The estate, when sold by the trustee, subject to the dower
of the widow, brought $2,626 06, and upon the interest of
Basil D. in the estate, I am of opinion he is entitled to be
regarded as the holder of the vendor's equitable lien, and to
be paid in preference to the general or judgment creditors of
George R. Spalding. For the residue of his claim, he must
share the fate of those creditors.
ROBERT J. BRENT, for Complainant.
ALEXANDER, for Defendant.
AMOS A. WILLIAMS
vs.
THE SAVAGE MANUFACTURING
COMPANY.
MARCH TERM,1851.
[CHANCERY PRACTICE—AMENDMENT W ANSWER—PRODUCTION OF BOOKS AND
PAPERS—MERGER OF STOCK.]
As a general rule, a special case must be shown before the Court will allow
a defendant to amend his answer.
Amendments will be allowed where new matter has come to the knowledge
of defendant since his answer was filed, or in case of surprise, or mistake,
or where an addition has been made to the draft of the answer after the
defendant has perused it, and in some other special cases.
This un-willingnees of the Courts to permit a defendant to change, or add to
the grounds of defence set up in the first answer, is increased when the
application is made after the opinion of the Court and the testimony have
indicated how it may be modified to accomplish his purpose.
An order granting the complainant the right to surcharge and falsify an ac-
count, was appealed from, and the Court of Appeals remanded the cause,
under the Act of 1882, ch. 802, for the purpose of amending the pleadings
and taking further testimony, and for further proceedings, and extended
the right to surcharge and falsify to both parties, provided defendant, by

  		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 418   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