4 D.C. 715 (C.C.D.C. 1836), 12,724, Shaw v. Shaw

Docket Nº:12,724[1]
Citation:4 D.C. 715, 21 F.Cas. 1199
Opinion Judge:CRANCH, Chief Judge,
Party Name:SHAW v. SHAW et al.
Attorney:C. Cox, in support of the same, and by Mr. Marbury, on the other side. C. Cox, in support of the demurrer, Mr. Marbury, contra, Mr. Cox, in reply,
Judge Panel:(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent), MORSELL, Circuit Judge, concurred.

Page 715

4 D.C. 715 (C.C.D.C. 1836)

21 F.Cas. 1199



SHAW et al.

No. 12,724 [1]

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term. 1836

Bill in equity by a feme covert [Mary Eleanor Shaw], by her next friend [Joseph N. Fearson], to have the proceeds of the sale of her share of the intestate real estate of her deceased father vested in a trustee for her sole and separate use, and to charge the loss, which occurred upon the resale, to the first purchasers, one of whom was a coheir with the plaintiff, and the other the husband of another coheir, and to make their shares of the purchase money liable for such loss. The bill states that the complainant's father, James Gannon, in 1829, died intestate, seized of certain real estate in Washington, leaving four children his heirs at law, namely, Michael Gannon, Margaret Drury, wife of Plumer J. Drury, Bartholomew Gannon, a minor, and the complainant, Mary Eleanor Shaw, wife of the defendant, William P. Shaw. That upon a petition for a division of the estate, according to the Maryland act of descents (Laws 1786, c. 45, § 8), the commissioners reported that it was not susceptible of division, without loss, & c., and on the 7th of June, 1832, it was ordered by this court that the commissioners should sell the estate upon certain terms of credit, and take bonds, & c., payable to each representative according to their respective shares, and that they should bring the money and bonds into court. That it was so sold, at public auction, on the 24th of November, 1832, on those terms, and with this further condition and notice; that the commissioners reserve to themselves the right, in case any purchaser should fail to comply with the terms of sale in five days, to resell the property, sold to him, at public auction, on reasonable terms, and after reasonable notice, and to charge and hold the former purchaser responsible for all loss, costs, and charges in consequence of such failure and resale. That the defendant, P. J. Drury, one of the representatives of the said James Gannon in right of his wife, was the purchaser of certain lots, part of the said real estate for $4,400; and that the defendant, Michael Gannon, one of the heirs, purchased another part of the estate, at the same sale, for $2,000. That the whole amount of sales was $6,538, to one fourth of which the complainant is entitled, after paying costs, & c. That Drury and Gannon neglected and failed to...

To continue reading