Purcell v. Maddox

Decided February 3, 1812

Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1812-02-03

<p>1. In a suit in Chancery, on behalf of a person who claimed a share of a residuum, as purchaser from one of the legatees, the administrator de bonis non, and all the children of the testator were defendants to the bill, but proceedings were had against two of them only; viz. the legatee of whom the plaintiff purchased, and another who also claimed the same share by a pretended purchase; it appearing that, by a decree in a suit in behalf of the administrator de bonis non, a division among certain persons as residuary legatees, had been directed, and one of the defendants now before the Court, had been ordered to pay to the other the share in question. Yet it was determin ed that proceedings should haYe been had against all the defendants; and the cause was remanded ta the Court below for that purpose.</p> <p>See Richardson’s Executors v. Hunt, 2 Munford, p. 148. and Hooper and Wife v. Royster and wife, 1 Munford, 119.</p>

Decided 1812-02-03

¶1the President delivered the Court’s opinion, that the decree of the County Court was erroneous, because proceedings were not had against all the defendants to the bill of the appellee ; although, upon the merits of the case, (as now disclosed,} this Court inclined to approve the said decree.

¶2The decrees of both the Courts below were, therefore, reversed ; and the cause remanded to the said Court of Chancery, and thence to the County Court,, to be finally proceeded in as to ail the parties aforesaid.