Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 H. & McH. 43

Somerville v. Trueman's Devisees

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 15, 1797

Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 1797-06-15

Appear from a decree of the court of chancery (Ks-missing the biil of complaint. Held: that a recital in a deed that the party had given a borní, is sufficient evidence of that fact; that it is. a confession of the party himself; and stronger than a verbal confession, being under his hand and seal. The parol evidence in this case strongly corroborates the written evidence produced.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1938

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1797-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The court on appears

[Rumsey, Ch. J. Macicarr and Jones, J.]

¶2Reversed the decree of the court of chancery, and decreed, that the chancellor pass and make a decree, directing that the appellees duly execute a deed or deeds of conveyance, to be acknowledged and recorded according to Jaw, thereby conveying to the appellant, James Somerville, lor life, with remainder in fee to the other appellants, as tenants in common, all the right, &c. of the said appellees, respectively, of, in and to, all those parts of two tracts or parcels of land called “Blackwell,” and “Thomas and Jlnthomfs Choice,” described and included within the limits and courses of the deed heretofore executed by Edward Trueman to James True-man, exhibited in the bill of complaint; and also decree a perpetual injunction, &c. &c.

/4/hmch/43 · .json · Public domain