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

NOTLEY YOUNG'S ESTATE 465
taken, they had no notice of the advancement, and conse-
quently that the advancement should not be brought into
hotchpot, so as to diminish her share of the proceeds of the
real estate now to be distributed, as thereby the fund to pro-
tect her surety from loss would be diminished.
The answer to this is that the-right which the heirs have,
that the estate advanced should be brought into hotchpot, is a
legal right, and that no alienations or incumbrances placed by
the heir advanced upon the property, given byway of advance-
ment, can defeat that right. If it were otherwise, it would at
all times be in the power of the heir receiving the advancement
to escape the application of the law upon the subject, by dis-
posing of or incumbering the estate given him by his ancestor.
These parties further insist, that forasmuch as the personal
estate is insolvent, and the fund now for distribution results
from the sales of real estate, they are under no obligation to
answer that portion of the petition which refers to donations
of personal estate, the ground assumed being that real estate
is to be brought into hotchpot only with real estate, and pep-
sonal estate only with personal estate.
This position, however, seems to me in opposition to the
opinion of the Court of Appeals in the case of the State use of
Wilson vs. Jameson, 3 G. & J., 842, in which it is very dis-
tinctly intimated that a Court of Equity will not suffer itself to
be baffled by any technical objection of this nature, but will
take care, in cases like the present, that the rights of all
parties in interest are adjusted "agreeably to the rules of
equity, amongst the most just of which is equality." Indeed,
from the language of the Court in the case referred to, it may
be very fairly inferred, that in an action at law on an admini-
stration bond, to recover a distributive share of the personal
estate, the defendant may avail himself to defeat the action of
an advancement to the plaintiff of real estate, if he avers in big
pleadings, and shows by the evidence that the property ad-
vanced was of equal or superior value to the plaintiff's snare
of the estate, though it was said that a Court of Equity would be
the more appropriate tribunal for the settlement of such questions.

  		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 465   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