¶1the President delivered the Court’s opinion, “ that there is no error in the said decree, except in the dismission of the bill, as to the appellee, before an account of' distribution of the personal estate of William Ball, deceased, other than the slaves, one third of which had been allotted to the appellee, in a manner satisfactory to all parties, pursuant to the decree of the county Court of Frederick. There - fore, it was decreed and ordered, that so much of the said decree as is mentioned above to be erroneous, be reversed, &c., that the residue thereof be affirmed, and that the' appellants pay to the appellee, being the party substantially prevailing, her costs, by her, about her defence ii: this behalf, expended. And it is ordered, that the cause be remanded to the said Court of Chancery, for an account and distribution to be made of the residue of the personal estate amongst all parties interested therein.”
3 Va. 279
Ball's devisees v. Ball's executors
Decided February 22, 1813
Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1813-02-22
A MARRIAGE being about to be Solemnized between William, Ball and Drusilla Singleton, two deeds were signed and sealed by them, both bearing date the 12ih of July, 1790; by the first of which, certain slaves, therein mentioned, (whereof she was then possessed as her own v r property,) and their increase, were conveyed to Samuel P. • . , . „ Minzies, in trust, for the use of said Drusilla until the • said marriage, afterwards to the use of the said William, Ball during his…
Decided 1813-02-22