Green v. Early
Decision Date | 16 January 1874 |
Citation | 39 Md. 223 |
Parties | THOMAS M. GREEN v. WILLIAM H. EARLY and WILLIAM H. TOWNSHEND, Garnishees of JOHN E. ROBEY and JOSEPH N. BADEN, trading as ROBEY & BADEN. |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Prince George's County.
The judgment on which this attachment was founded, was recovered against Joseph N. Baden, and another in Calvert County at the February Term, 1870; the attachment was issued on the 28th of May, 1870, directed to the sheriff of Prince George's County, and filed in the Circuit Court thereof, on the 31st of May. Joseph N. Baden, by deed in which his wife joined conveyed his lands in Prince George's County to Townshend on the 2nd of May, 1870. The simultaneous mortgage and single bills for the unpaid purchase money were made payable to his wife, and the mortgage was assigned by her and her husband to Early, on the 5th of May, 1870; the single bills being at the same time assigned by Mrs. Baden in the presence of her husband. The mortgage and assignment were recorded on the 11th of May, 1870. The attachment was laid in the hands of both Early and Townshend, who appeared and pleaded nulla bona. It will be noted that the judgment was not recorded in Prince George's County before the sale of the land. The other pertinent facts appear in the opinion of the Court.
The case was tried before the Court, without a jury, and judgment being for the defendants, the attaching creditor appealed.
Exception.--At the trial below, the plaintiff offered four prayers, all of which were rejected by a divided Court; FORD, A. J., being in favor of granting them, and MAGRUDER, A. J., in favor of rejecting them. The first prayer, which alone was considered by this Court, is as follows:
The defendants offered six prayers, all of which were rejected by the Court. The third prayer, which was rejected by a divided Court, (MAGRUDER, A. J., being in favor of granting it, and FORD, against it,) was as follows:
To the Court's refusal to grant the plaintiff's prayers, and the rejection of the same by a divided Court, the plaintiff excepted.
The second exception of the plaintiff was to the entry of judgment for the defendants by the Court, after...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Nichols v. Sober
...v. Wyckoff, 4 Hill 442; Ely v. Norton, 2 Abb. 19: 3 Keyes 397; Mining etc. v. Windham, 44 Vt. 495; Avery v. Johann, 27 Wis. 250; Green v. Early, 39 Md. 223; Taylor Baker, 5 Price 306; Huff v. Wagner, 63 Barb. 215; Harger v. Wilson, 63 Barb. 237. OPINION Graves, J. Sober sued on the common c......
-
Fetterhoff v. Sheridan
... ... Among other cases so holding are Stockbridge v ... Fahnestock, 87 Md. 136, 39 A. 95; Luckemeyer v ... Seltz, 61 Md. 324; and Green v. Early, 39 Md ... 223. When the attachment is so laid, the garnishee can set up ... in his answer the fact of the alleged assignment to a third ... ...
-
Nicholson v. Condon
... ... name of the wife at the time the suit was brought to set ... aside the deed, and she was a party defendant. In Green ... v. Early, 39 Md. 223, she had disposed of the property, ... and the question was presented against her assignee. It ... appeared that a ... ...
-
In re Woods, Weeks & Co.'s Estate
... ... between the Garretts and Woods, Weeks & Co.; these began, as ... it appears by the record, as early as 1875 ... Woods, ... Weeks & Co. were merchants engaged in the business of ... importing and refining sugar, and had an ... on Prom. Notes, sec. 197; Magruder v. Peter, 11 G. & J. 217; Price v. McDonald, 1 Md. 403; Smoot v ... Andrews, 19 Md. 398; Green ... ...