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 447   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

SEWELL VS. BAXTER AND WIFE. 447
fraught with so much inconvenience and probable injustice to
the estate of Durkee, and, therefore, this bill must be diminished.
Though, under all the circumstances of the case, I do not think
it would be right to subject the complainant to costs. The
course he has taken, does not appear to me indicative of a dis-
position to harass the defendants unnecessarily, and, therefore,
though the relief he has applied for is deemed inappropriate in
the peculiar circumstances attending this case, I am still of
opinion, that it would not comport with the principles which
govern this court, to dismiss him as a party who comes before
it, without any claim whatever, to its favorable consideration.
The bill will, therefore, be dismissed, but without costs.
WM. M. ADDISON and L. H. WILLIAMS for Complainants.
T. PARKIN SCOTT for Defendants.
SEPTIMUS D. SEWELL
vs. MARCH TERM, 1851.
JAMES BAXTER AND WIFE ET AL.
[PAROL EVIDENCE—VOLUNTARY COMVEYANCE VOID AS TO CREDITORS—RESULT-
ING TRUSTS—LACHES AND LAPSE OF TIME.]
THE decisions in this state, are conclusive to show that parol proof is inad-
missible, to vary the consideration stated in deeds, and thereby, either to alter
their character, or to maintain them when impeached for fraud, by showing
considerations, differing from those mentioned in them, though evidence of
the same kind of consideration, varying only in amount from that expressed,
may be offered.
An indebtment at the time of making a voluntary conveyance is, in this state,
prima fade only, and not conclusive evidence of a fraudulent purpose, even
with respect to a prior creditor, and this presumption may be repelled, by
showing that the grantor, at the time of the gift was in prosperous circum-
stances, possessed of ample means to pay his debts, and that the settlement
upon the child, was a reasonable provision, according to his or her station
and condition in life.
Yet, when such indebtedness is shown, the burthen is thrown upon the grantee of
establishing the circumstances which shall repel the fraudulent intent, and the

  		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 447   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  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives