Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 Md. 433

Colvin v. Warford

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 29, 1861

Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 1861-10-29

The bill iti this case, filed on the 25th of June 1860, by the appellees against the appellant, alleges that the complainants, as eight out of eleven heirs at law of Rachel Colvin, instituted an ejectment suit in the Superior court of Baltimore city, and obtained a verdict and judgment in their favor for eight-elevenths of the real estate of the said Rachel; that the defendant is in possession of all said veal estate, claiming as devisee under a will of said Rachel, which…

Decided 1861-10-29

Bartol, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of this court.

¶2It is unnecessary for this court to determine whether, upon the case stated by the bill of complaint, an injunction was properly granted by the circuit court, and a receiver appointed. We are ail of opinion that there was error in the subsequent order of the 14th of July I860, refusing to dissolve the injunction, and continuing the same, and refusing to rescind the order appointing a receiver.

¶3Whatever equity the complainants may have had under their bill, to claim the interposition of the court in their behalf, upon the ground of apprehended danger to their interests, in the event of their ultimate success in the action of ejectment now pending, has been taken away by the answer of the appellant, which, under the rules governing proceedings in chancery, must be taken as true, so far as the same is responsive to the allegations of the bill. See Code, Art. 16, sec. 103. A decree will be signed reversing the orders of the circuit court, dissolving the injunction, and discharging the receiver, and remanding the cause.

¶4Orders reversed and cause remandedt

/17/md/433 · .json · Public domain