Jenkins v. State

• Decision Date: 04 February 1892
• Citation: 23 A. 608,76 Md. 255
• Parties: JENKINS ET AL. v. STATE, TO USE OF STAYLOR ET AL. [1]
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

23 A. 608

76 Md. 255

JENKINS ET AL. v. STATE, TO USE OF STAYLOR ET AL. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Maryland

February 4, 1892

Appeal from Baltimore city court.

Action in the name of the state, for the use of Caroline L. Staylor and John J. Dobler, administratrix and administrator of William A. Staylor, deceased, against George C. Jenkins and others, to recover on an administratrix's bond. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants appeal. Affirmed.

MCSHERRY J., dissenting.

Argued before ALVEY, C.J., and IRVING, ROBINSON, MCSHERRY, and BRISCOE, JJ.

Arthur W. Machen and William A. Fisher, for appellants.

John P. Poe and John J. Dobler, for appellees.

BRISCOE J.

This is an action brought in the name of the state, for the use of the equitable plaintiffs, against the principal and surviving obligors, on a bond conditioned for the faithful performance of the duties imposed on the principal as administratrix. The facts, as presented by the record, are these: William Staylor died intestate in the year 1877, leaving a widow, Jane Staylor; a son, William A. Staylor; and a daughter, Miriam Staylor. Letters of administration were granted upon his estate to the widow by the orphans' court of Baltimore city, and the Messrs. Jenkins, the appellants, with a Mr. Whitiford, who has since departed this life, were sureties on her bond. The personal assets of the estate amounted to about $41,000, the principal part of which consisted of an interest in the firm of Jenkins, Staylor & Co., of which he was a member, together with the appellants in this case. On or about the 12th day of June, 1877, William A. Staylor, the son, executed a deed to his mother, Jane Staylor, in which he assigned and conveyed to her "all the right, title, interest, and estate, real, personal, and mixed, of his deceased father, and in any property of which his father died seised and possessed." This deed was properly executed, the consideration being $500, and was signed by his wife, Caroline L. Staylor. Jane Staylor, the administratrix, passed, on the 26th of June, 1880, an administration account, in which she charged herself with the whole personal estate, and, after an allowance for debts and expenses, distributed the residue, which amounted to about $27,000, as follows: Two-thirds to herself, in her own right and as assignee of William A. Staylor, under the deed, and one-third to the daughter, Miriam. William A. Staylor, the grantor in the deed, departed this life, intestate, on the 16th of June, 1878, one year after the execution of the deed, leaving surviving him a widow and two infant children; and shortly after his death, on the 10th day of January, 1879, proceedings were begun in the circuit court of Baltimore city against Jane Staylor, in behalf of his widow and infant children, to vacate and annul this deed, upon the ground of fraud and undue influence, and the circuit court, on the 16th day of September, 1880, decreed that said deed be vacated and set aside, and ordered that the case be referred to the auditor to state an account between the said William A. Staylor and Jane Staylor, in her individual right and as administratrix; she, in her character as administratrix, and the said Caroline L. Staylor and John J. Dobler, administrators of William A. Staylor, having been made parties to the bill. Testimony was then taken, and the case heard upon exceptions to the auditor's account. After notice to the parties, and a full hearing, the court, on the 28th of November, 1884, overruled the exceptions, and by a decretal order ratified and confirmed the account, and ordered that the administratrix of William A. Staylor pay to the administrators of William A. Staylor the amount found to be due by her, to-wit, the sum of $3,699.37, with interest from November 17, 1880. There was no appeal from the decree vacating the deed, nor from the decretal order of the 28th of November, 1884; and, upon a failure of the administratrix to pay over the money in accordance with the order, suit was instituted by order of the court, upon the bond.

The principal questions in the case arise partly on demurrer and partly on bills of exceptions to the admissibility of testimony. Some of the questions were disposed of by this court on a former appeal, reported in 70 Md. 472, 17 A. 392. To the declaration which assigned the non-payment of the money in accordance with the decretal order of the court as a breach of the condition of the bond the defendants pleaded general performance, and a special plea, setting forth the fact of the deed of June 12, 1877, and the distribution in the orphans' court thereunder. The plaintiffs demurred to the first plea, and, by way of replication to the others alleged (1) that the deed was vacated and set aside by the decree of the circuit court for causes existing at the time of its execution, and that the accounting and distribution were annulled by the circuit court; and (2) that the defendant had notice of the pendency of the proceedings in the court where the deed was set aside. The defendants demurred to the replication; and, it being overruled, the sureties then filed rejoinders to the replication. Other pleadings were then filed on the part of the plaintiffs and defendants; but they relate principally to the effect of the deed of the 12th of June, 1877; to the decree of the court vacating said deed, and the decretal...