5 D.C. 496 (C.C.D.C. 1838), 16,899, Vaughan v. Northrop

Docket Nº:16,899[1]
Citation:5 D.C. 496, 28 F.Cas. 1113
Party Name:VAUGHAN et al. v. NORTHROP.
Attorney:R. S. Coxe, for the defendant, and R. J. Brent, for the plaintiffs. Mr. Coxe, for the defendant R. J. Brent, for plaintiffs. Mr. Coxe, in reply.

Page 496

5 D.C. 496 (C.C.D.C. 1838)

28 F.Cas. 1113

VAUGHAN et al.

v.

NORTHROP.

No. 16,899 [1]

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Nov. 1838. [2]

The bill in equity in this cause, stated that the plaintiffs, [James Moody Vaughan and others,] all of Virginia, are the lawful and only children of Catharine Moody, deceased, who intermarried with their father, and who was the only child, next of kin, and heir of James Moody, who, in 1802, died intestate in Fayette county in Kentucky; and that the plaintiffs are his only next of kin and legal heirs and distributees, and that he left no widow. That the defendant Henry Northrop, obtained letters of administration of his estate in Kentucky, and received assets more than sufficient to pay all his debts and funeral expenses, & c. and particularly, that he received, in the District of Columbia, at least $5,200 from the United States, under the act of congress of July 5, 1832 (4 St. 563), for military services of the said James Moody, in the Revolutionary War, in the naval or military service of the state of Virginia, and that the plaintiffs, by the said act of congress, are entitled to receive the same, as next of kin to the said James Moody, but the said defendant Northrop refuses to account to the plaintiffs for the same; and confederating with Benjamin Moody, and twenty-one others, defendants, (naming them,) all of Kentucky, and two of Maryland, (also naming them,) denies that the plaintiffs are, but affirms that the defendants (except Northrop) are, the next of kin of the said James Moody, and that he has accounted with them therefore, and the plaintiffs charge that the claim of the defendants is fraudulent and against conscience, and pray that an account may be taken of the personal estate of the said James Moody, which came, or ought to have come to the hands and possession of the defendant Northrop, as administrator, and of the debts, funeral expenses, & c., and that the residue, after paying all legal charges and just debts, may be ascertained and distributed among all the plaintiffs as next of kin of the said intestate. The defendant Northrop, in his answer, excepts to the jurisdiction of the court, and prays that his exception may avail him as if he had demurred to the same; and the cause was heard as upon demurrer, and argued by R. S. Coxe, for the defendant, and R. J. Brent, for the plaintiffs. Mr. Coxe, for the defendant, contended that a foreign...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP