|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE CAPE SABLE COMPANY'S CASE. 621
this writ of fieri facias was seat from Baltimore to Anne Arundel
by consent; yet no such consent of The Cape Sable Company could
give jurisdiction to a court, where none such was given but in a
prescribed manner. That at the March term, in the year 1822, of
the Baltimore County Court, these defendants Luke W. Barber,
Thomas Barber, George Slye, and Samuel C. Love severally ob-
tained judgments against The Cape Sable Company; upon each of
which judgments writs of fieri facias were issued and returned
nulla bona to the September term of that year of the same court.
After which, on the 22d of January, 1823, writs of fieri facias
issued on the same judgments to the sheriff of Anne Arundel;
which were returned nulla bona to the April term of the same year
of the court of that county. That no further or other process was
issued thereon until the first day of June, 1824; when, by consent,
without any scire facias to revive them, writs of fieri facias were
taken out from Anne Arundel County Court on each of them, and
levied upon all the property of The Cape Sable Company; which
was advertised to be sold on the same day appointed for the sale
under Oliver's execution; that all four of these last mentioned
judgments had been satisfied by money advanced by the defendant
Carroll to the defendant Harper, who afterwards assigned them to
the defendant as a security for the money so lent and advanced by
him; that on the 4th of June, 1824, after the property of The Cape
Sable Company had been actually taken in execution and adver-
tised for sale, actions of debt on these same judgments were dock-
eted by consent, and judgments confessed thereon in Baltimore
County Court for the use of the defendant Carroll; that although
these latter judgments may be void; yet the property of the The
Cape Sable Company, in which these plaintiffs have so large an
interest, cannot be thus subjected at law to a double execution for
the same debts; and that the sole object of all these proceedings
has been to deprive these plaintiffs of their rights, and to exclude
them from all connexion with The Cape Sable Company as legal
and equitable stockholders therein. Whereupon the bill prayed for
an injunction to stay the proceedings at law, &c. Which was
granted accordingly.
Richard Caton, by his answer to this bill, admitted that the pro-
ceedings at law had been had as stated; but averted, that they
were all bona fide, and that there was no fraudulent intention on
the part of any of the defendants, &c. The defendants Robert G.
Harper and The Cape Sable Company answered to the same effect,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
