Page images
PDF
EPUB

DUVALL v. THE FARMERS' BANK.

A petition for the production of books and papers to be used on a trial at law, must give a sufficient description of such documentary evidence.

THIS petition was filed on the 11th of October, 1830, by Grafton B. Duvall against The President, Directors and Company of the Farmers' Bank of Maryland. The petition states, on oath, that the petitioner had been sued by the defendant in Anne Arundel County Court, on two several promissory notes, endorsed by him and a certain Richard Duvall, and drawn by the late Lewis Duvall, that those suits stand for trial at the next term of that court; that the books, writings and papers of the said bank now in its possession or power, contain material and necessary evidence; and that he cannot safely proceed to the trial of those cases without the benefit of the said testimony. The petitioner

tor or administrator in full acknowledged and recorded in manner and time as prescribed for acknowledging and recording conveyances of lands by way of mortgage, shall have the same effect as a release to the grantor. 1833, ch. 181, s. 1. And moreover, that it shall not be necessary in any cause of foreclosure or sale of mortgaged property, to make the heirs of the mortgagee parties to the same; but that any decree upon any bill for foreclosure or sale aforesaid, filed by the executor or administrator of the mortgagee, shall have the same effect as if the said heirs were parties as aforesaid. 1833, ch. 283.

How far these acts of assembly may have made any material change in the nature of the estate of the heirs of the mortgagee; and their right to have a foreclosure in opposition to the claims of the widow and next of kin upon the fund considered as personalty gathered into the hands of the executor or administrator; or in what manner they operate upon the interests of his heirs or devisees in general; or upon any such peculiar interest as has arisen in this case; or upon the title of a purchaser under a decree for a sale, remains to be determined. For it may be made a question, how far the general assembly can, constitutionally, change the nature of an estate, or dispense with the presence of any one as a party to a suit so as, in effect, to deprive him of his property; or to divest him, arbitrarily, and without compensation, of any pecuniary advantage to which, according to the confessedly legal terms of his contract, he would be entitled. According to the law, as well settled before and at the time when these acts were passed, the mortgagor could not recover in ejectment unless he proved, that the mortgage had been satisfied previous to the bringing of his action; or there was a sufficient foundation to presume such a re-conveyance as extinguished the mortgage. Powell Mortg. 397; Beal v. Harwood, 2 H. & J. 172. But satisfaction must be shewn by deed or the presumption of a deed; otherwise a legal title might, contrary to the spirit of the law, rest on mere parol proof not recorded, nor sanctioned by circumstances and lapse of time. The proceedings in equity are properly conclusive against the executor or administrator; but upon what principle can they be made to operate against the holder of the legal estate who is no party to them? Moore v. Plymouth, 5 Com. Law Rep. 232.

therefore prayed, that the bank might be ordered to produce either the original books, writings, and papers, or copies of such parts of them, certified by a justice of the peace, as contain evidence pertinent to the issue or relative to the matters in dispute between the parties.

11th October, 1830.-BLAND, Chancellor.-It is required and Decreed, that the President, Directors and Company of the Farmers' Bank of Maryland, on or before the first day of the next term of Anne Arundel County Court, produce, on oath, by the cashier of the said institution, either the original books, writings, or papers, or copies thereof, certified by a justice of the peace, as prayed; provided, that a copy of this order, together with a copy of the said petition, be served on the president or cashier of the said institution on or before the 15th instant; and provided also, that any cause shewn against the execution of this decree may be heard on the 21st instant.

The bank, by its answer, filed on the 12th of October, 1830, shewed cause and insisted, that, before it could be required to produce their books and papers as ordered, the petitioner should specify the particular extract, or writings, or paper which he supposes would be pertinent to the issue in the said cases, without which it would be impossible for it to comply with the order; and it alleged, that it was not aware of any paper being in its possession which would be of service to the petitioner in defending the said suits; or indeed of the defence which he intended to make.

23d October, 1830.-BLAND, Chancellor.-This case standing ready for hearing, and having been submitted by the plaintiff on the petition and answer alone, the proceedings were read and considered.

This is a proceeding under the special provisions of the act of assembly, which authorizes this court to require the production of books and papers relative to the matter in issue on a bill instituted in this court, or on the trial of any action at law. (a) In all such cases it should appear, that the applicant has an interest in the document for that special purpose; (b) and the petition should, with some reasonable degree of certainty, designate the books and papers wanted, if practicable, by their marks, number and names; and also should specify the facts expected to be proved by them at

(a) 1798, ch. 84; McMechen v. McLaughlin, 4 H. & McH. 166.—(b) Wigram on Discovery, 199; Calvert on Parties, 10.

the trial in the court of common law. This is a proceeding which can only be regarded as one of the modes whereby a party may obtain testimony to sustain his case; and therefore, as on all similar applications, the granting of which may be attended with delay, where the propriety of granting it does not sufficiently appear from the nature of the case; or the documentary evidence, called for, is not described in the proceedings of the suit in which the application is made, the petition should be at least as specially descriptive of the evidence and proof of facts, expected to be obtained from the books and papers required, as in an affidavit, stating the nature and materiality of the proof expected to be obtained from an absent witness, without whose testimony, a party alleges, that he cannot safely go to trial, and, therefore moves for a continuance of his case in a court of common law. The cases are so strikingly analogous, that the rules and principles, with few exceptions, applicable to one class of cases, may be well applied to the other. (c) In this instance, the petition is entirely too indefinite and general.

Whereupon, it is Decreed, that, the cause shewn being deemed sufficient, the decree of the 11th instant be rescinded; and the petition be dismissed with costs to be taxed by the register.

(c) 1 Vern. 334; Jessup v. Duport, Barnar. 192; Steward v. The East India Company, 9 Mod. 387; Smith v. Northumberland, 1 Cox, 363; Burton v. Neville, 2 Cox, 242; Oldham v. Carleton, 4 Bro. C. C. 88; Rougemont v. The Royal Exchange, &c. 7 Ves. 304; The Princess of Wales v. Liverpool, 1 Swan. 119; Jones . Lewis, 1 Cond. Cha. Rep. 438; Mendizabel v. Machado, 1 Cond. Cha. Rep. 553.

INDEX.

ABATEMENT.
A creditor's suit by and against legatees
and devisees, abates by the death of
one of the plaintiffs, who leaves others
to take his interest.-Hammond v.
Hammond, 310.

A petition by some of several infants
against others, to have land sold for
their benefit, does not abate by the
death of one of them.-Tilly v. Tilly,

440.

ACCOUNT.

A decree to account with special direc-
tions.-Cox v. Callahan, 51; Ham-
mond v. Hammond, 309.

A commission to state accounts, ordered
with special directions.-Sloss v. Mcll-
vane, 73.

Decree that tenants in common of a ferry,
account for its profits.--Norwood v.
Norwood, 477.

ACTS OF ASSEMBLY.
No evidence can be admitted to explain
the meaning of an act of the legisla-
ture.-Binney's case, 150, 152.
Private acts regarded as contracts bind-
ing on the parties who apply for them,
151.

As to private acts, some evidence may,
under some circumstances, be admit-
ted as to their construction, 151, and
note.

The meaning of an act of assembly may
be illustrated by reference to the sub-
ject spoken of, 154.

A private act, giving the Chancellor au-
thority to act, executed on an ex parte
petition.-Campbell's case, 215.
Private acts, the mode of obtaining them,
their nature, and the cases to which
they may be applied, 226, 234, 237.
A private act considered as a conveyance
binding only on the parties to it; and
may be set aside on the ground of fraud,
229, 233.

No fact can be assumed by the legislature
to the prejudice of the rights of an
individual, 229.-Waring v. Waring,

676.

An act of assembly may be declared void,
on the ground of its absurdity, apart
from any constitutional objection.-
Campbell's case, 231.

A marriage originally valid between then
living parties, although a contract, can
only be annulled by the general assem-
bly, 235.

An act giving authority to mortgage the
real estate of a deceased person for
the payment of his debts, may bind his
heirs or devisees who applied for it,
but cannot affect the rights of his cre-
ditors, 237.

The acts in relation to proceedings against
non-resident, absconding, or contuma-
cious defendants, considered.-Buck-
ingham v. Peddicord, 447.

ALIMONY.

The nature of alimony, and the cases
in which it will be allowed.-Helms
v. Franciscus, 565; Macnamara's case,
566; Lynthicumb's case, 568; Scott's
case, 56S; Govane's case, 570.

ANSWER.

The exceptions to an answer heard and
sustained by the Chancellor, and the
defendant ordered to put in a better
answer. Parker v. Mackall, 63.
A writing which purports to be the
answer of several, but is not sworn to
by all of them, may be taken off the
file; or considered as the answer of
him only, who has sworn to it.-—Bin-
ney's case, 109.

A defendant may sufficiently answer by
adopting the answer of his co-defen-
dant, 110.

Upon an answer of an infant or lunatic,
in a creditor's suit; admitting or not
denying the facts stated in the bill, a
decree for a sale may be at once ob-
tained.-Campbell's case, 225; Ham-
mond v. Hammond, 352; Chamberlain
v. Brown, 221; Boucher v. Bradford,

222.

An answer to the same facts over-rules

the plea.-The Bank v. Dugan, 257.
If the plaintiff sets the case for hearing
on bill and answer, or moves thereon
for an order to bring money into court,
he admits all the facts set forth in the
answer.-Contee v. Dawson, 267.
The answer of a non-resident defendant
is a judicial record of this state, and
must be authenticated as such, accord-
ingly, 282.

An answer may, by consent, be received
without oath, and will be allowed to
have full effect, as regards co-defen-
dants, 285.

An answer on affirmation, before the re-
volution.-Gardner v. Dick, 277,
An insufficient answer is as no answer;
and therefore, upon such default, the
bill may be taken pro confesso, and a
final decree passed.-Buckingham v.
Peddicord, 447.

A plaintiff not allowed to file new excep-

tions, but must have the new answer
put to the test of those first filed, 459.
A defendant permitted by a supplemen-
tal answer, to explain equivocal ex-
pressions, leaving the first answer to
stand.-Murdock's case, 463.

APPEAL.

A decree of the Court of Appeals sent to
the Court of Chancery to be executed,
cannot be there revised or modified
in any way whatever.-Crapster v.
Griffith, 23.

Where there is a reasonable doubt, in a
caveat case, patents are allowed, so as
in effect, to give the benefit of an ap-
peal.-The Rail Road v. Hoye, 263.
Where the Court of Appeals remand the
case, or leaves any thing to be done
by the Chancellor, the case should be
brought before the Chancellor by peti.
tion, with a copy of the decree of the
Court of Appeals.-Contee v. Dawson,
305; Tyson v. Hollingsworth, 330.
An appeal bond, on the decree being
affirmed, becomes thereby an addi-
tional security for the debt.-Andrews
v. Scotton, 669.

ARBITRATION.

No direction in a will, nor any agreement
to refer to arbitration, can oust the
courts of their jurisdiction.-Contee
v. Dawson, 275.

Upon an award, returned under an order
referring the case to arbitration, there
may be a decree, 276.
Arbitration or compromise, recommended
by the Chancellor.-Norwood v. Nor-
wood, 478, 484.

This court never compels the performance
of an award, unless made on a sub-
mission in court, 479.

ATTACHMENT.

A party may be arrested any where, and
brought before the court under an at-
tachment.-Crapster v. Griffith, 15.
When an attachment is in the nature of
mesne process, the sheriff may take
bail for the party's appearance; and
on a return cepi, he may be ordered to
bring in the body; or he may sue on
the bail bond.-Binney's case, 101;
Deakin's case, 408.

It is in most cases, better to decide on
the motion to dissolve the injunction
before an attachment for a breach of it,
is disposed of, 102.

A person may be ordered to remove an
erection, which he has made in breach
of an injunction, as a part of the pun-
ishment under an attachment, 102.
The mode of obtaining and proceeding
upon an attachment for a breach of an
injunction. Murdock's case, 486.
Pragmatic trespassers, pending an in-
junction, may be made to remove
erections made by them on the pro-
perty in controversy, 487.

A party taken under an attachment to
enforce the payment of money, may
be discharged by producing a release
under the insolvent law.-Andrews v.
Scotton, 663.

AUDITOR.

The auditor may be ordered to proceed
to state the account immediately, un-
less prevented by particular circum-
stances. Crapster v. Griffith, 8.
A case may, on good cause shewn by
affidavit, be remanded to the auditor,
with leave to take further proof, 21.
Where the case set forth in the bill, is
such as to entitle the plaintiff to relief,
the court may have further inquiries
made by the auditor, so as to adapt the
relief to the peculiar nature of the case.
Townshend v. Duncan, 45; Tilly v.
Tilly, 444; Addison v. Bowie, 611;
Norwood v. Norwood, 477, 482.
The office, power, and duty of a master
in Chancery, in England, and of the
auditor of this court.-Townshend v.
Duncan, 45.

Auditor's fees under the provincial go-
vernment, 61, note.

Report under a decretal order to account.
Parker v. Mackall, 65.

An exceptant ordered to pay a fine, for
the delay, on over-ruling his exceptions
to the auditor's report.-Woodward v.
Chapman, 71.

A commission to account with special
directions.-Sloss v. Mcllvane, 73.
An order directing certain persons to
state an account.-Cheseldine v. Gor-
don, $1.

A trustee having the profits of the estate
in his hands, ordered to pay the audi-
tor's fees. Winder v. Diffenderifer,

176.

A witness or party, ordered to account,

may be summoned, and compelled to
give evidence before the auditor.-
Hammond v. Hammond, 310.
Books and papers ordered to be produced
to, and lodged with the auditor.-Nor
wood v. Norwood, 477.

In a creditor's suit, the auditor's report
may be at once confirmed, as to all

« PreviousContinue »