| Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 269 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
OHIO LIFE INS. AND TRUST CO. VS. WINN & ROSS. 269 appellant. The course now proposed would be establishing a new, and, as it seems to me, dangerous precedent, and one which may in this particular case result in consequences in- jurious to the appellant. The argument, is, that if money enough is retained to cover the dividends allowed the appellant, with interest and costs, this cannot happen, and that the court should not extend the operation of the appeal, and the effect of the appeal bond further than may be necessary to secure this object. It has been already shown, however, that the Court of Appeals may, upon this appeal, if the decree of this court is re- versed, entirely recast the accounts by letting in claims and classes of claims which have been excluded, and thus prejudice the appellant, if the petitioner is permitted to receive the divi- dend which has been allowed him by these accounts. There is, moreover, another view, which demonstrates con- clusively, as I think, the impropriety of paying the petitioner his dividend until the appeal shall have been decided. It will be seen, upon reference to the exceptions of the appellant, Glenn and others, to the Auditor's report, that the claims of the petitioner, Vickers, numbered 61, 62 and 63, are specially objected to, as not entitled to participate to any extent in the fund for the reason set forth in the exception. Now, suppose this exception, which has been overruled by the order of this court, should be sustained by the Court of Appeals, is it not manifest that the appellant may be aggrieved, if notwithstand- ing the appeal and bond, the dividend to Vickers should be paid? The ground of the exception is, that these claims of Mr. Vickers should not be permitted to come in upon the fund at all. But this court thought they were entitled to come in, and let them in, and thus diminished the dividend allowed to Mr. Glenn, the appellant, and the propriety of this decree of the Chancery Court is the question to be decided by the Court of Appeals. If the appellant succeeds upon his appeal, his di- vidend will be augmented, and yet it is said ho can receive no prejudice if the court retains as much money as will pay the dividend awarded him by these accounts, although that divi- dend is. undeniably less than it will be if his appeal to the Su- perior Court is successful. |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
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 269 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