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 4, Page 25   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

WATSON VS. GODWIN. 25
which offer not being accepted, cannot be used with much effect
in the progress of the cause: that, at all events, it is cer-
tainly not now in the power of the Court to say that the fact
that the defendant owes this precise sum, is ao conclusively
established aa to be open to no further controversy at any
subsequent stage of the cause. The application must be over-
ruled.
TEACKLE and BARROL, for the Complainant.
ALEXANDER and GILL, for the Defendants.
JOHN WATSON AND OTHERS
vs. DECEMBER TERM,1851.
GEOEGE W. GODWIN AND OTHERS.
[SALE OF LANDS UNDER ACT OF 1785, CH. 72, SEC. 12.]
IT must appear to the Chancellor that all the parties interested will be bene-
fited by gelling the property, before a decree for a sale can be passed
under the Act of 1785, ch. 72, aec. 12.
The jurisdiction of the Court cannot be sustained, unless the bill alleges that
it will be for the interest and advantage of all parties interested that the
land should be sold.
Making the infants complainants, does not dispense with the necessity of
proof in support of the allegation that it will be for their interest to have
the land sold.
Neither the answer of the infant, nor the answer of adult defendants con-
fessing the fact, is evidence to affect the infant.
A bill for a sale under this Act may, consistently with the practice of the
Court, be converted by amendment into a bill for a partition.
[The original bill in this case was filed by George Watson
and wife, on the 20th of June, 1849, for a sale of certain lands
devised to the wife of the complainant George, and her sister
Ann, the wife of the defendant Godwin, aa tenants in common
in equal shares. The answer of Godwin and wife denies that
the sale would be advantageous to those entitled, and objects
thereto.
After the commission was issued to take testimony, the wife

  		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 4, Page 25   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