|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
580 NEALE t, HAGTHROP.
individuals, who are, in truth, ignorant of the whole matter as to
which the bill requires any disclosure; but who are made defen-
dants as having an interest in the matter in controversy, have been
permitted, by this general mode of answering, to deny the whole
bill, and to put the plaintiff to prove all its allegations at the hear-
ing, (a) If, however, it appears from the bill, that the defendant has
any knowledge of any matter in it, he may be required to answer
more fully and particularly to the extent of his knowledge or belief.
Divesting this case then, of all extraneous matter; of all that
relates to the two first administrators of the late Anthony Hook;
because this plaintiff is incompetent, in the representative charac-
ter in which he sues, to recover any thing, but so much of the
personal estate of his intestate as remains in specie; or has re-
mained, and is now in the hands of any one who can be regarded
as a trustee for the use of the late Anthony Hook and his represen-
tatives. Of all that which relates to the next of kin of the late
Anthony Hook; because none of them, as such, can have any title,
but from one of his administrators, and no such title is alleged or
pretended; and also, because none of them are made parties to
this suit as plaintiffs; and Barbara Hagthrop and James Hook,
who have been made defendants, are neither charged as, nor make
any claim or defence in right of their being two of the legal repre-
sentatives of the late Anthony Hook. And the case, when thus
cleared, is on the part of the plaintiff simply this:
By a deed, bearing date on the 17th of August, 1797, the late
Anthony Hook conveyed certain property, therein mentioned, to
the late John Hook, on the terms specified in the deed; which
property came to the hands of the late John, and after his death
passed into the hands of Hagthrop and wife, as his administrators,
and is now held and detained by them and the other defendants
who claim under them. The plaintiff alleges, that this property,
according to the nature and terms of the deed, was conveyed to
John as an indemnity in case, and upon condition, that he should
pay certain debts therein specified; which have not been paid.
And consequently, that the late John Hook had held, and his legal
representatives, and those who claim under them, now hold this
property as trustees for the use of the late Anthony Hook, and his
legal representative, who is now the present plaintiff. Upon which
the complainant prays, that this property may be accounted for and
delivered up, together with the profits thereof.
(a) Drury v. Connor, 6 H. & J. 291.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
