1. D, on the 1st of January 1819, rent-
ed a parcel of land to M for one year,
and so from year to year, at an annual
rent of $160, to be paid half yearly.
R. occupied the premises in the years
1819, 1820 and 1821, and he so occu-
pied the premises in 1821, under a
contract with D, for the same rent,
and on the same terms. In Septem-
ber 1820, D claiming $240 for rent
RESCINDING OF CONTRACT.
in arrear on the 1st of July 1820, dis- See Agreement 6, 11.
trained the property of R. On the
18th of May 1821, R paid $88 to D,
and he also paid him $50 on the 18th See Attachment 1, 2.
of August 1821; he made no applica-
tion of the first payment, but applied
the last payment to his own debt,
and said he owed a part of the rents
-Held, that the property of R, found
on the premises at the time of the
RETURN OF PROCESS.
See Attachment 6.
Fieri Facias 3.
distress, was liable for the rent of See Court of Appeals 2.
1819; and that the payment made on
the 18th of May 1821, must be ap-
Judgment 6.
Procedendo 1.
plied to the rent becoming due after
the distress in September 1820. Rat-
cliff v Daniel,
See Court of Chancery 47
1. The sheriff's bond is an annual bond,
and the sureties of each year are res-
ponsible for the neglects, defaults,
acts and receipts, of their principal,
during the time only between giving
the bond passed by them, and the
execution of the next year's bond.
Hewitt & Russell v The State use
Brown,
See Manumission 1.
Negroes & Slaves.
SPECIAL AGREEMENT.
See Agreement.
SPECIAL AUTHORITY.
See Baltimore 1, 2, 3.
Corporations 1.
SPECIAL DESCRIPTION.
See Fieri Facias 3.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
1. Specific performance of a contract
decreed as to part of a square of
ground, where a conveyance of the
whole square was claimed. Graham
et ux. v Yutes & Myers's Heirs et al.
229
See Court of Chancery 21, 22, 23.
SPECIAL REQUEST,
STATUTE OF FRAUDS.
1. A sheriff's sale of land under
of fieri facias is within the statute of
frauds, &c. Barney v Patterson's Lessee,
2. The property qualification required See Request.
by the 42d article of the constitution
of this state, was not intended as a
fund to secure the sheriff's official
creditors in addition to the bond re-
quired of him as sheriff. Roberts v
Gibson's Ex'r. et al.
196
3. In order to make B eligible as she-
riff, in case he should be elected, A
conveyed to him certain lands, with
an agreement to be reconveyed, &c.
These lands were reconveyed-And
as to this transaction being a fraud
upon the law, &c. see COURT OF
CHANCERY 5, and Roberts v Gibson's
116
Ex'r. et al.
4. A sheriff's sale of land under a writ
of fieri facias is within the statute of
frauds, &c. Barney v Patterson's
Lessee,
182
See Agreement 13, 14.
Attachment 6, 7.
A court of law cannot entertain ac-
tions upon verbal contracts within the
statute of frauds, on the ground of
fraud in refusing to perform them.
Lamborn v Watson,
Lamborn & Moore,
See Agreement 3, 14.
Court of Chancery 15, 22.
Fieri Facias 4.
Parol Evidence 4.
1. All statutes made in pari materia are
to be taken and construed together,
as if they were one system; and that
1. Trover for goods mortgaged to se-
cure a usurious debt cannot be sus- See Award 11, 12.
tained, unless the plaintiff has tender-
ed the amount actually loaned. Lu-
UNCERTAIN & UNCERTAINTY.
cas, Trustee of Jamison, v Latour, See Bequest 1, 2, 3, 4.
Agreement 7.
Bill of Exchange 1.
Competency of Witness 1.
Insurance 7.
USAGE & CUSTOM.
1. A custom brought home to a party
dealing with a bank, enters into the
essence of the contract, becomes a
constituent part of it, and must have
its due weight in the exposition of it.
The Bank of Columbia v Magruder's
Adm'x.
2. The allowance of three days of grace, See Covenant 1.
in the payment of negotiable pa-
per, from long and universal usage,
has become the gencral law of such See Dower.
contracts, but it is not such an inflexi-
ble rule as admits of no innovations
upon it.
3.
It may be altered and controled
by the agreement of the parties, and
what is tantamount, it may be changed
by the usage and custom of dealing
perfectly known to the parties, and
to which they will be supposed to
have had special reference in making
their contract.
16.
1. Whether the will in this case was re-
voked by a subsequent marriage and
birth of a child? Quere. Tongue v
Morton,
In the construction of a will, the in-
tention expresed by the testator, to
be collected from the whole of the
instrument, by comparing and consid-
ering the different parts together, if
it be consistent with the rules of law,
in relation to the nature and operati-
on of the estate devised, must pre-
vail, giving effect, if possible, in the
exposition, to all the words of the
will. It is not necessary that techni-
cal terms, or any particular form of
words, should be used to convey the
meaning of the testator. Beall's Les-
see v Holmes
207, 208, 224
3. Where there are words in a devise,
which would be sufficient to carry a
fee, if it was the intention of the tes-
tator to give one, but which intent
does not clearly appear from the
words themselves, then if there be
an introductory clause, it may be re-
sorted to, to explain their meaning.
Ib. 2 0
But when the words of the de-
vise have a fixed and definite mean-
ing, and import in law an estate for
life, the introductory clause, showing
that the testator meant to dispose of
all his property, cannot enlarge it to
an estate in fee.
Ib. 222, 223
5. The rule in Shelley's case is equally
applicable to limitations in wills as in
deeds. Lyles v Digges's Lessee, 364
6. The word issue in a willis sometimes
a word of limitation and sometimes
of purchase, according to the con-
text of the devise.
7. Whether or not letters testamentary See Executor & Administrator 11, 13.
can be granted by the orphans court on a copy of a will certified to have been proved in another state? Quere. Ratrie v Wheeler's Ex'r.
8. A, by will, bequeathed her slave Mary to B, for life, and that at B's death Mary was to be free. During the life of B, Mary had issue-Held, that such issue were slaves for life. Chew v Gary, See Bequest. Devise.
Executor & Administrator 10.
1. If a witness swears that he was present at the birth of a child, and the opposite party proves that he was not present, such proof is substantially to defeat the credit of the witness, and his testimony may be corroborated by proof of his prior decla rations. Cooke v Curtis, et al. Lessee. 93
2. If a party objects to the competency of a witness offered on the adverse side, and the court sustain the objection, and the party making it, afterwards waives it, and consents that the witness be examined, the party offering the witness has no right to require of the court to decide that he is competent independent of the waiver of the objection. Beall's Lessee v Lynn,
Guardian & Guardian's Bond 2.
Husband & Wife 5.
Promissory Note 6, 7.
Words tending to charge an unmar ried woman with fornication, are not 248 actionable. Stanfield v Boyer. 2. A variance between the words charged in the declaration, and the words 16. proved, is fatal.
WRIT OF ERROR. Where a confession of judgment, by way of supersedeas, was entered into on the 17th of November 1815, to stay execution agreeably to the act of 1814, ch. 84, on a judgment rendered on the 9th of May 1815, and a writ of error issued on the 2d of February 1822 to remove the proceedings on the judgment by confession -Held, that the writ of error be quashed, more than three years having elapsed from the judgment by confession, and the issuing the writ of error. Andrews, et al. v W. & J. Bosley, 99
See Appeal 2, 4, 9.
WRIT OF ERROR BOND. See Appeal Bond.
WRIT OF INQUIRY, 336 See Inquiry of Damages.
|