Seabrook v. Grimes
| Citation | 68 A. 883,107 Md. 410 |
| Parties | SEABROOK et al. v. GRIMES et al. |
| Decision Date | 26 February 1908 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Maryland |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Carroll County, in Equity; Wm. H. Thomas Judge.
Bill by William L. Seabrook and another, administrators of Samuel B Grammer, against E. Oliver Grimes, executor of Emily J Rippard, and others, receivers to enforce a trust. From a decree for defendants on demurrer, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Argued before BOYD, C.J., and BRISCOE, PEARCE, SCHMUCKER, BURKE, and WORTHINGTON, JJ.
D. N. Henning, for appellants.
E. Oliver Grimes, Jr., and Edward O. Weant, for appellees.
The bill of complaint in this case was filed in the circuit court for Carroll county by the appellants, administrators d. b. n. c. t. a. of Samuel B. Grammer, and Samuel J. Conly, against E. Oliver Grimes, Jr., executor of Emily J. Rippard, deceased, John H. Mitten, and E. Oliver Grimes, Jr., and Wm. L. Seabrook, receivers, to enforce an alleged trust in favor of said Samuel B. Grammer created by the last will and testament of William H. Grammer, deceased, the father of said Samuel B. Grammer. William H. Grammer died in 1862, leaving a last will and testament, executed in 1861, and duly admitted to probate, the material provisions of which are as follows:
Emily Jane Grammer, after the testator's death, married James Rippard, and died in 1905, having in 1903 sold to John H. Mitten a half interest in the newspaper then published by her in Westminster, Md., called the "American Sentinel," together with the plant and material used in publishing the same; it being the same newspaper, and some portion of the same plant, owned and published by said William H. Grammer at Westminster at the time of his death, and which was included in the property disposed of by his will. Emily J. Rippard left a last will and testament duly probated, and appointed E. Oliver Grimes executor thereof, as is alleged in the bill of complaint; but there is no copy of said will in the record, or any allegation in the bill of the disposition made by it of her property. Samuel B. Grammer died in 1880, leaving a last will and testament, by which he devised and bequeathed all his estate, real and personal, to his aunt, Louisa C. Conly, and constituted her his executrix. This will was duly admitted to probate, but Louisa C. Conly renounced as executrix, and letters of administration d. b. n. c. t. a. were subsequently granted to Wm. L. Seabrook and David N. Henning on said estate, and Louisa J. Conly has assigned and conveyed to Samuel J. Conly all her interest in the property devised and bequeathed to her by the will of Samuel B. Grammer.
The bill of complaint alleges that the American Sentinel was purchased by William H. Grammer in 1850, and was conducted by him with such skill and ability as to become very profitable and of great value, and that it became, and has since continued to be, the organ of the Republican Party in Carroll county, and still is the only Republican political newspaper published in said county; that under the provisions of the will of said William H. Grammer the said newspaper, plant and material, good will, and subscription lists vested in the said Emily Jane Grammer "in trust for the said Samuel B. Grammer during his lifetime, and at her death passed to the said Samuel B. Grammer and his heirs; that under the will of the said Samuel B. Grammer all his interest and estate became vested in his legatee Louisa C. Conly; that under the deed of Louisa C. Conly the said property became vested in her grantee, Samuel J. Conly, from the time of its execution; that the legal title of all said property is vested in Wm. L. Seabrook and David N. Henning, administrators d. b. n. c. t. a. of Samuel B. Grammer, to be administered in due course of law." The bill also alleges that upon the death of Emily J. Rippard the said Wm. L. Seabrook, then sole administrator c. t. a. of Samuel B. Grammer, laid claim "to said American Sentinel (newspaper), plant, and all the property and rights incident thereto, for the benefit of the heirs and claimants under the will of Samuel B. Grammer," and that thereupon E. Oliver Grimes, Jr., executor of Emily J. Rippard, and John H. Mitten, filed a bill against Wm. L. Seabrook then sole administrator c. t. a. of Samuel B. Grammer, alleging the conflicting claims of title to said newspaper and plant, and procured a decree appointing the said E. Oliver Grimes, Jr., and the said Wm. L. Seabrook, receivers, with power and authority to take charge of and conduct said newspaper and plant until the determination of the title thereto, which is still undetermined. The bill also alleges that the said Emily J. Grammer from time to time used and applied a portion of the income and profits derived from the publication of said newspaper "to the maintaining of said newspaper and plant, and replenishing material incident and necessary thereto as occasion arose, as she was required to do by the trust reposed in her by the last will and testament of said Wm. H. Grammer," but never did execute the trust reposed in her of educating and maintaining said Samuel B. Grammer during his minority, or for any period thereof, but, on the contrary, required him from his earliest childhood to support himself and contribute to her support by his labor in the office of said newspaper, and that there has never been an accounting in respect to said trust by said Emily J. Rippard. The bill then prays (1) that the receivers state an account of their receipts and disbursements; (2) that said receivers be ordered to deliver possession of the property held by them as receivers to the said administrators of Samuel B. Grammer; (3) that the executor of Emily J. Rippard state an account of the income derived by her from said newspaper and the disposition thereof; (4) that the conveyance of one-half interest in said newspaper to John H. Mitten be declared fraudulent and void.
The defendants, the executor of Emily J. Rippard, the receivers, and John H. Mitten each demurred separately to the whole bill: (1) Generally; (2) because the court had already assumed jurisdiction over the same subject-matter in the receiver suit; and (3) for other good causes. It will thus be seen that the bill does not seek to enforce the alleged trust as to any property other than this newspaper and plant, and that the title to that alone is here in controversy.
The primary and fundamental matter for determination, therefore is the character and quality of the estate taken by Mrs. Rippard in this newspaper plant and business, and the nature and extent of the trust declared by the will in favor of Samuel B. Grammer in so far as it affected said newspaper plant and business. It has long been held that a specific bequest of articles of personal property which one consumed in their use vests in their legatee absolutely, though given for life. Preston on Legacies, 95; Randall v. Russell, 3 Merivale, 194. In that case Sir William Grant said: "A gift for...
To continue reading
Request your trial