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 4, Page 356   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

§56 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY,
would be to carry it much beyond the meaning of those who
passed it.
It seems two judgments were rendered against Wm. S. Green
ou the 17th of April, 1837, one at the suit of the state, the
other at suit of Nicholas J. Watkins. They were rendered
on cases filed and docketed by consent, that of the state, how-
ever, standing first upon the docket. The question submitted is,
how are these judgments to be paid ? Shall they come in and
bo paid pari passu, or is the state entitled to priority in pay-
ment, assuming that the parties, in virtue of their judgments,
stand in equali jure, which they do if the judgments are to be
regarded as cotemporaneous.
Now, I take it to be well settled that the state, by the com-
mon law, is entitled to such priority, and that whenever she
and a citizen have claims in equal degree, and a conflict arises
by death or the act of the party not leaving enough to pay his
debts, the claim of the citizen must yield to the right of the
state. 2 H. & McE., 198; 3 H. & McE., 171; 1 U. & J.,
417. This principle was affirmed by the late chief justice of
the Court of Appeals, in the elaborate and able opinion deliv-
ered by him in the case of The State vs. The Bank of Mary-
land, 6 Gill & Johns., 205, 226. It was said in that case,
"that the priority of tho state is a rule only in the distribution
of the property of the debtor, requiring the debt due to the
state to be paid first where the individual creditor has no ante-
cedent lien overreaching it." The state, then, is entitled to
her priority, unless there is an antecedent lien, and here there
is none. I am of opinion, therefore, that the judgment of the
state of April term, 1837, is entitled to a priority over that of
Nicholas J. Watkins, rendered at the same term.
Ordered, that the case be, and the same is hereby referred
to the Auditor, with directions to state a further account in
which the Farmers Bank of Maryland shall be credited with
such sum of the proceeds of the mortgaged real estate as may,
according to the tables, be an equivalent for the contingent
dower interest of Mrs. Matilda E. Green, the widow of William
S. Green, she having relinquished her dower to said bank.

  		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 4, Page 356   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