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 2, Page 73   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

NELSON ET AL. VS. TURNER. 73
EDMUND R. NELSON ET AL
vs. MARCH TERM, 1850.
NAAMAN TURNER. J
[JURISDICTION—EQUITY.]
THE Court of Chancery has no jurisdiction to decide that a return to a writ of
fasri facias or venditioni exponas is defective—the court out of which the writ
issued, alone having cognizance of the question of the sufficiency of the return.
If a defendant in a judgment at law objects to the return by the sheriff, he may
appear in the county court, at the term to which the writs were returnable, and.
move to quash them, or retain possession of the land sold, and effectually de-
fend himself in an action of ejectment, brought by the purchaser, or upon pro-
ceedings under the act of 1825, ch. 103, if the description of the land in the
return was so far defective as to render it void for uncertainty.
The father of the plaintiffs in this case, having failed to adopt either of these
modes of resistance, and having, by various acts and declarations, free from
all equivocation or doubt, acknowledged the perfect validity of the purchaser's
title—under these circumstances, there can be no principle of equity which
would justify the active interposition of this court in his favor, or in favor of
those who claim under him.
[The facts of this case are fully set forth in the Chancellor's
opinion.]
THE CHANCELLOR :
This bill was filed on the equity side of Somerset County
Court, and prays that a decree or order of that court, passed on
the 17th August, 1847, under the authority of which, the land
in the proceedings mentioned, was conveyed to the defendant,
may, together with the conveyance, be vacated; and that
said land may be decreed to be conveyed to the complainants,
as the heirs at law of Tubman Nelson, deceased; and for an
account of the rents and profits, &c.
It appears by the pleadings and evidence, that in the year
1823, a degree was passed by said court, for the sale of the real
estate of William Stanford, deceased, and that, on the 21st of
January of the following year, the trustee named in the decree
made sale of the land in question, to the said Tubman Nelson,
consisting of a part of a tract of land called "Newbenny," which
8

 
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 2, Page 73   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  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives