| Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 246 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
246 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY. to commissions on the income of the real and personal estate. The allowance as in that case will be seven and one-half per cent. on the income of each. An order then will be signed consolidating the three cases, and the referring the case as consolidated to the Auditor for the purpose of taking an account to ascertain the amount of the trust fund with which the defendant, Richard W. Higgins, is chargeable according to the principle& stated in this opinion. This to be taken from the pleadings and proofs now in the cause, and such additional proofs as the parties may lay before him, for which a reasonable time will be allowed. And if it is de- sired, the order may also provide for the sale of the remaining trust fund, but no distribution of it in kind can be made until the accounts are stated. MCLEAN and ALEXANDER, for Complainants. R. W. GILL, for Defendants. ANTHONY SMITH ET AL vs. DECEMBER TERM, 1847. JOHN CHANEY. [DEFICIENCY IN LAND SOLD.] A PURCHASE of land containing 181 acres, more or less, at so much per acre, was made in ]841, and at the sa.me time the vendor agreed in writing to make deduction out of the purchase money for so much of the land sold, "where peaceable possession could not be given." The vendor, subsequently execu- ted a deed to the vendee for the land, describing it by metes and bounds, course and distance, and as containing 181 acres, more or less, and put the lat- ter in possession of the whole. This deed contained no covenants. HELD— That the stipulation on the part of the vendor was fully discharged by putting the vendee in possession of the land, and the latter could not claim an abate- ment of the purchase money for a part of this land, of which he, subsequent- ly, permitted himself to be dispossessed. The deed being subsequent in date lo the contract for an allowance in case of deficiency must be considered as taking the place of all previous agreements on the subject, and as containing the full and entire contract of the parties. A vendor selling in good faith is not responsible for the goodness of his title beyond the extent of the covenants in his deed. |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
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 4, Page 246 View pdf image (33K) |
|
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.
Maryland State Archives