Case law

Pue v. Pue

4 Md. Ch. 386 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Sep 15, 1848

denials of the answer in regard to the use of this road as a matter of right, and its assertion that its enjoyment was the result of the leave or favor of this defendant, granted to those under whom the plaintiff claims, is clearly … with the presumption of a grant which the complainant seeks to establish; and if the case rested upon their evidence alone, I do not very well see how the presumption could be resisted.

Smallwood v. Hatton

4 Md. Ch. 95 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Sep 15, 1853

Hook, 1 Gill & Johns., 271, was far more precise and specific, and yet the Court of Appeals refused to entertain an appeal from it, saying, that however clearly the Chancellor may have *101 intimated Ms opinion, or declared … The ground on which he applies for relief, is of a totally different character, and as has already been shown, he has failed in establishing it. The injunction will, therefore, be dissolved, and the bill dismissed.

Bank of Westminster v. Whyte

1 Md. Ch. 536 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1850

The general rule is too firmly established to be questioned, that no matter how absolute a conveyance may be on its face, if the intention is to take a security for a subsisting debt, or for money lent, the transaction will … the bank in the' negotiation with Suter, from which it could be fairly inferred that the object was to take security for money loaned, or to be loaned, it would fall within the general rule ; and the transfer could not be qualified

Bank of Westminster v. Whyte

3 Md. Ch. 508 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1850

The general rule is too firmly established to be questioned, that no matter how absolute a conveyance may be on its face, if the intention is to take a security for a subsisting debt, or for money lent, the transaction will … Bank, in the negotiation with Suter, from which it could be fairly inferred that the object was to take a security for money loaned, or to be loaned, it would fall within the general rule, and the transfer could not be qualified

Pue v. Pue

1 Md. Ch. 382 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1849

The principle appears to be, that you are not to disturb the prior devise further than is absolutely necessary for the purpose of giving effect to the posterior qualifying disposition. 1 Jarman on Wills, 414. … This construction, therefore, would defeat the general intent of the testator, which, though first expressed, shall overrule the particular intent, as is now fully established. 1 Jarman, 411, in the notes.

Holmes v. Mitchell

4 Md. Ch. 162 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1850

In that case it was said, that the word “use” was so qualified by its connection with the word “hire,” as to give the legatee for life nothing more than a right to the service and labor of the slaves. … I am clearly of opinion it would, and that if the words hire or use merely give to the legatee the right to the service and labor of the slaves, the words “income or use” employed in connection can do no more, and that the

Jamison v. Jamison

4 Md. Ch. 289 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1847

It may be sufficient to say that it does not very clearly appear, which of these two parties was most to blame for the discord which marred their domestic happiness whilst they lived together as man and wife. … It is certain that the act of 1841 conferring jurisdiction upon the equity courts authorizes them to grant divorces both absolute and qualified upon grounds which are not warranted by the canon law of England.

Hughes' Case

1 Md. Ch. 46 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Apr 11, 1825

Hence, it clearly follows, that in all cases of this kind, even where the courts of common law and of equity have concurrent jurisdiction; the law and course of proceeding of the forum resorted to must be pursued. … and has, in part, prescribed the manner in which such partition may be obtained; and, consequently, so far this court must act according to the prescribed mode; but,- in all other respects, it must be governed by its own established

O'Hara v. Shepherd

3 Md. Ch. 306 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1851

But the Chancellor does not see very clearly how the question is brought before him, or by what form of order or decree he can settle it. … The deposition of William McNeir, the mortgagor, taken before the Auditor on the 18th of September, 1852, is so full, explicit, and unanswerable, and so completely establishes the knowledge, consent, and co-operation of George

Gill v. McAttee

2 Md. Ch. 255 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Jul 15, 1851

Ghiselin et al., 5 Gill, at page 182 , the Court of Appeals repeat what had been repeatedly said before, “that courts of equity have properly required that every agreement shall be clearly and explicitly established before … to be unsettled by the courts, it has been so qualified, as only to apply to cases where the notice is so clearly proved as to make it fraudulent in the purchaser to take and register a conveyance in prejudice to the known

Thomas v. Wood

1 Md. Ch. 296 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Sep 15, 1848

My opinion, therefore, is, without multiplying authorities upon a point which seems very clearly settled, that Samuel W. … It is true, the section referred to does say, “that a widow accepting or abiding by a devise in lieu of her legal right shall be considered as a purchaser with a fair consideration but this language is qualified by the preceding

Williamson v. Wilson

1 Md. Ch. 418 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Apr 24, 1826

With regard to the authentication of claims, and the conflicting rights- of claimants, the court will be governed by its established rules in similar cases, as any such .questions may arise. … But, in personal property taken in execution by him, he has in all cases a qualified interest, so far as to hold possession, to sell and make the money, wherewith to satisfy the plaintiff.

Gill v. Griffith

2 Md. Ch. 270 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1848

if they, or either of them, is void for any reason, there can be no doubt they are entitled to a decree for the sale of the property contained in them, to satisfy the claims, which, by the decree of this court, has been established … Whatever may have been the cause for this, whether the result of an agreement, promise, or mere acquiescence in the expressed request of the mortgagor, and to-save his feelings from mortification, it is so clearly repugnant

Corrie's Case

2 Md. Ch. 488 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · May 31, 1830

That provision of the federal constitution, which declares that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states; (q) looks to other privileges, such as the … And by a comity, now prevalent among all civilized nations, founded on this concession to living owners, qualified by a proper regard to itself and its citizens, an administration granted under the law of the deceased’s domicil

Ohio Life Insurance & Trust Co. v. Ross

2 Md. Ch. 25 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Sep 15, 1848

The same principle is established by the case of Jackson vs. … Van Valkenburgh, 8 Cowen, 264. .Assuming this to be the ground, and it seems too clearly established by authority, and justified by principle to dispute it; and it would be difficult to maintain, that,Dawson and Nor-wood,

Williamson v. Morton

2 Md. Ch. 94 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1851

Williamson her sole executor, who duly qualified as such. Upon the bill of Charles A. … But although the account is in this respect clearly erroneous and prejudicial to the legatees : still it is most plausibly urged, that as Mrs.

Doub v. Barnes

1 Md. Ch. 127 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Dec 15, 1847

And the question, therefore, is, has he succeeded in establishing by evidence those averments, upon which his title to the aid of this court depends. … Mason, I cannot very clearly see what qualifying interest they have in the event of the present controversy. The assignment is without recourse to them, except as to their rights to assign and transfer the judgments.

Walker v. House

4 Md. Ch. 39 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Mar 15, 1848

The authorities already referred to, establish this proposition, in my opinion, very clearly, and are in nowise contravened by the cases of Wilson vs. Greenwood, 1 Swanst, 481, and Harding vs. Glover, 18 Ves., 281. … His report does not inform the court whether he did or did not do so, and the defendant has made this apparent omission to qualify, the ground of a special exception, and there can be no doubt that unless the Auditor did

Contee v. Dawson

2 Md. Ch. 264 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Sep 6, 1826

(a) Taking this view of the subject, it is clear, that a mere devise over will not, in all cases, cause the forfeiture to be enforced on a suit’s being brought; but, it must clearly appear, from the nature of the case, that … The legacy is directed to be equally divided among all, if all should become so qualified to take.

Owings' Case

1 Md. Ch. 290 · High Court of Chancery of Maryland · Jun 15, 1827

In short, there' are many instances in which the court will recognise and act upon the fact, that a person is in a partial or complete state of insanity, without requiring that fact to be established by a return to a writ … But it does not appear, that this petitioner, who was appointed by the decree as the trustee of Rebecca, ever gave bond or qualified as required.