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

474 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
words merely indicating that further responsibilities may be
assumed or advances made by the mortgagee to the mortgagor,
by which the creditors of the latter may be defrauded by com-
binations between the parties to the instrument or by the acts
of the mortgagee alone, will not avail; and that notwithstand-
ing the introduction of such terms, the mortgage will only
operate, either in law or equity, as a lien or charge on the
property mortgaged to the extent of the sum or sums which
may appear on its face. This Act of Assembly, therefore, as
interpreted by the Court of Appeals in the case referred to,
limits these mortgagees, Neale and Luckett, to the sum which,
upon the face of the instrument, is specifically secured by it.
But if this difficulty could be overcome, there is another
objection to granting either the prayer of the petition, or the
application of Neale and Luckett to rescind the order of the
15th of November, 1850, and reform the account which by that
order was ratified and confirmed, which appears to me to be
insuperable. Between the passing of that order and the
filing of the present petition, the whole of the December Term
intervened, from its commencement to its close; and the order,
therefore, which is equivalent to a decree, must be regarded as
enrolled. Burch et al. vs. Scott, 1 G. & J; 393. And being
so enrolled, the cause cannot be reheard upon petition, the
only remedy of the party against whom the decree was passed,
being a bill of review for error appearing on its face, or upon
some new matter discovered since. Ibid., 424.
I am, therefore, of opinion that the petition must be dis-
missed, and the order of the 15th of November, 1850, be per-
mitted to stand.
[The last opinion in the case was delivered on the 17th of
January, 1853, upon the question as to the allowance of com-
mission to the attorney for the collection of certain claims due
the estate, and upon exceptions filed to the Auditor's account.
The facts, in relation to these points, sufficiently appear in the
opinion itself.]

  		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 474   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