¶1tit cided that the case did not come within the provisions o! the acts of !'?83, ch. 80, and 1801, ch 7i Hut whether the on1 oí error abaten, the case being under rule argument, the court were not then prepared to decide, and the final decision of the question they postponed for iurther consideration, Afteiivards, at June term, Í807, Use court derided, that a writ oí error or appeal did not abate by the death of either party, U the case wa s standing under rule argument before the death was suggested. This decision was made by the co.nt independent of the act of A'iíveníber 1800, cA. 90* s# 11.
2 H. & J. 34
Lynch v. Colegate
Decided June 15, 1806
Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 1806-06-15
The bill of complaint of Colegate, the present appellee, filed the 10th of November 1800, stated, that one Kingsmore, in 1797, purchased of Lynch, the appellant, a tract of land for a large sum of money, to be paid by instalments; that the first instalment amounted to ¡61200, and was intended, in a great measure, to be paid out of the first crop on the land, and by the sale of wood; that Lynch declared that the. wood on the land would nearly pay for the land, and it was…
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1821
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1806-06-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →