|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEALE v.. HAGTHROP. 561
estate of every description of her late husband; and ratified, so
far as it respected her dower or thirds, the sales made by Hagthrop
and wife as administratrix, or either of them. Which part of the
ten acre lot was afterwards conveyed by Mary Hook to Samuel
Young and Francis Young, and by them conveyed to William
Rawlings, the testator of the defendant Benjamin Rawlings, which
several conveyances referred to the deed of the 17th of August.
That Catherine Orbin, a daughter of Anthony Hook, on the first
of January, 1805, executed a deed under seal to Hagthrop and
wife as administratrix of John Hook, whereby she acknowledged
the receipt of. £121 0s. 0d. current money as the full amount of her
proportion of her father's estate, and ratified, so far as it respected
her part, the sales made by them. That the defendants Hagthrop
and wife as administratrix of John Hook, at several times sold
merchandise to a considerable amount to two other of the children
of Anthony Hook, for which they gave receipts, as for so much to
be deducted out of their respective distributive shares of their
father's estate. And that Mary Hook, the widow and administra-
trix de bonis non of Anthony Hook, died sometime in the year
1805, after which administration was granted, as stated in the bill,
to this plaintiff.
After the case had been set for hearing, the solicitors of the
parties by a writing, filed on the 4th of November, 1826, agreed,
that the bill be so amended as that the prayer for subpoena should
include the name of James Hook.
6th December, 1826. —BLAND, Chancellor. —This case standing
ready for hearing, and the counsel on both sides having been fully
heard, the proceedings were read and considered.
It will be proper to recollect as we proceed with the exposition
of this case, that this is a bill professedly for relief against these
defendants, as the alleged unjust holders of certain specified assets
of the plaintiff's intestate; and that therefore, if the plaintiff is
entitled to relief of any kind, according to the nature of his case,
he is, as a consequence of such right, entitled to an account from
the defendants, of the rents and profits of the property so wrong-
fully held by them, and to a discovery from each as to all matters
in relation to such an account. The plaintiff's title to relief is
obviously and necessarily the first and preliminary question to be
decided; for it would be idle to go into any account of rents and
profits, or to ask for or to consider any discovery so made, if the
plaintiff is not entitled to relief in some one form or other, accord-
71 T. 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
