Mandru v. Asiiby

• Decision Date: 20 November 1908
• Citation: 108 Md. 693,71 A. 312
• Parties: MANDRU v. ASIIBY et al.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

71 A. 312

108 Md. 693

MANDRU

v. ASIIBY et al.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Nov. 20, 1908.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Prince George's County, in Equity; George C. Merrick, Judge.

Suit by Mary Lovering and others against Ida Ashby and Ida Ashby as executrix. Louisa Mandru intervened. Decree for plaintiffs, and intervener appeals. Reversed.

Argued before BOYD, C. J., and BRISCOE, PEARCE, SCHMUCKER, BURKE, THOMAS, WORTHINGTON, and HENRY, JJ.

T. Van Clagett, for appellant.

HENRY, J. The appellant was an intervening petitioner in a creditors' suit instituted in the circuit court for Prince George's county, in equity, by Mary Lovering and others, against the appellee; the bill praying that a deed from Jordan L. Stanley to the appellee be set aside, and that the property conveyed by said deed, or so much thereof as may be necessary, be sold for the payment of the debts of the decedent. The deed was set aside by the court, the property sold, and the claims of the creditors originally suing were satisfied and paid, but the claims of the appellant, who was duly admitted as a coplaintiff by the court, were rejected, and from the decree she has appealed to this court.

Her claims against the estate of Jordan L. Stanley are based upon two notes, filed as exhibits with her petition, and which are as follows: "$241.00. Canton, O., July 3, 1890. Ninety days after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Mrs. Louisa Mandru two hundred and forty-one dollars, with interest at the rate of 8 per centum per annum, at Strausburg, Ohio, interest payable annually, and I herely authorize an attorney at law to appear in any court of record in the United States, after the above obligation becomes due, and waive the issuing and service or process and confess a judgment against me in favor of the holder hereof for the amount then appearing due together with costs of suit, and thereupon to release all errors and waive all rights of appeal. J. L. Stanley. [Seal.]" The second note was as follows: "$7.00. September 8, 1892. One day after date I promise to pay to the order of J. Mandru seven dollars at——. Value received. J. L. Stanley." On the back of this note was the following indorsement: "Pay to the order of Louisa Mandru. Simon Mandru, Executor of Jos. Mandru, without recourse."

It was admitted by the defendants that these notes were duly executed by Jordan L. Stanley, and it was satisfactorily established by proof that no payment had been made on either of them. The defense interposed to each is the plea of limitations, and as to the second of said notes, which is not under seal, it is conceded that such plea is a bar to the right of action. The note for $241, however, is under seal. The creditors' bill was filed January 21, 1905, and the petition of the appellant was filed August 29, 1905, or less than 10 years after the maturity of the note. The defendants took no testimony of any kind, but, from the opinion of the court (Merrick, J.) printed in the record, we take the following: "These notes were made in Ohio, where, as shown by the statute read to the court, private seals...