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

MITCHELL VS. MITCHELL. 77
the title and lien in the same person. The case was .taken to
the Court of Appeals, and will be found reported in 2 Gill,
230.
The appellate Court, it would seem, do not express a posi-
tive opinion in reference to the existence of the charge in point
of law; but the terms of the will of Francis J. Mitchell are tod
explicit and direct to leave any doubt upon the subject, and it
is agreed on all bands that the charge did originally exist, and
that it is now extinguished by the descent of the title to the
property upon the complainant in whose favor the lien was
created.
The principal question presented in this case is, whether
the personal obligation upon James D. Mitchell to pay his
sister this sum of money, resulting from his acceptance of
the devise in his favor in his father's will, and his refusal or
neglect to execute the release required of him, (assuming that
be did refuse or neglect to do so,) is so far obligatory upon him
as to render his personal estate in the hands of his adminis-
trator liable, though the property charged with the payment
of it has devolved by law upon the party to whom the payment
was to be made ?
The plaintiff's case, as it appears to me, does not come very
strongly recommended to the favorable consideration of the
Court. By the events which have occurred, she has become
the owner in fee of the property given by the will to James D,
Mitchell, and in respect of which this burden was imposed upon
him. She has, also, by his death, if not before, become the
owner of the Davidson estate, the refusal or omission to relin-
quish which constitutes the ground of the personal claim
against him, and I am strongly inclined to think that there is
admissible evidence in the record of the former cause, and
which, by agreement, is made evidence here, as if taken under
a commission in this cause, that she did enjoy the benefit
of that property during his lifetime. At all events, I think
it cannot be doubted that her brother always intended,
and even attempted, to comply with the directions of his
father's will in this regard, and consequently that he never

  		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 77   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  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives