Sullivan v. Tuck
High Court of Chancery of Maryland
[This bill was filed for the specific performance of a contract entered into by the defendant’s testator, Robert W. Bowie, of Prince George’s county, with the complainants, trading under the firm of John Sullivan .and Sons, in Baltimore.
Read the full summary
[This bill was filed for the specific performance of a contract entered into by the defendant’s testator, Robert W. Bowie, of Prince George’s county, with the complainants, trading under the firm of John Sullivan .and Sons, in Baltimore. The complainants agreed to become the agents of the deceased for the sale of his crops; to advance money, and to accept his drafts, to secure the payment of which the deceased pledged his crops then on hand, and the growing crops of the year 1847, and died in January, 1848. Large advances were made by the complainants on the faith of this arrangement, to…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor :
If the case is to be governed by the principles applicable to the relation of factor and principal, I am satisfied the complainants cannot succeed, as the lien resulting by operation of law, from that relation, cannot be extended to property situated as this was, at the period of the death of Mr. Bowie. If at that time the property had been in the hands of these parties, I incline to think, that, independently of contract, and looking alone to the rights resulting from the usages of trade, the complainants would have been entitled to retain it, not only for the charges and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lee v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1834
- Woods v. Fulton & StarckCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1818
3Cited by9 opinions
- Livesley v. JohnstonOregon Supreme Court · 1904
- Ady v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1918
- Eastern Rolling Mill Co. v. MichlovitzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1929
- Mobley v. MobleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1926
- Ridenbaugh v. ThayerIdaho Supreme Court · 1905
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.