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

WALKER, ADM'R OF HOUSE ET AL VS. HOUSE. 49
improper conduct, and show that he cannot be safely entrusted
with the joint estate. And unless this is satisfactorily estab-
lished, the court, according to Mr. Grow, will not exercise its
power and appoint a receiver to collect in, and dispose of, the
property. Gow, 382.
But although, according to the authorities, the legal title in
the property of the partnership, in the event of the death of one
survives to the others, the beneficial interest does not so sur-
vive, and it is the duty of the survivors within a reasonable
time to settle up the business and account with the executor of
the deceased for such interest, and if they fail to do so, a court
of equity will grant an injunction restraining them from dispos-
ing of the joint stock and from receiving the outstanding debts.
Gow, 378, Story on Part., sec. 322, note 1. And the execu-
tor has a right to insist that the value of the property of the
firm shall be ascertained in the way in which it can be best ascer-
tained, by a sale. The surviving partners have no right to take
the whole property, do what they please with it, and settle with
the executor upon a calculated value. Crawshay vs. Collins,
15 Ves., 218, 226; Story on Part., see. 822, note 1. The de-
fendant in his answer expresses the opinion that the stock of
this partnership can be disposed of at private sale most advan-
tageously, but at the same time declares his willingness, if the
administrator of the deceased partner desires it, and the court
so direct, to sell the whole at public sale.
Samuel House, the deceased partner, died in the month of Jan-
uary of the present year, and the bill in this case was filed on the
first of this month, being but four months from the death of the
deceased partner. It is quite clear, therefore, that a reasonable
time has not been allowed for adjusting the business of the con-
cern, and on that ground, there is no foundation for the inter-
position of the court in the form in which, its power is invoked.
And as the charge of insolvency against the surviving partner
is most explicitly denied by the answer, it is impossible to say
that there will be danger in confiding to him the management
of the joint estate, which the law confessedly devolves upon
him.
4*

  		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 49   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