Smith v. Baker
High Court of Chancery of Maryland
[Certificates upon certain escheat warrants were caveated in these cases upon the ground that certain lots included in them had previously been granted to the caveators, and which they had taken up as vacancy. These caveats wore resisted upon the ground that the title to such lots never passed to the caveators by their patents, but still remained in the state, and were, therefore, liable to he taken up by the eaveatees under their escheat warrants.
Read the full summary
[Certificates upon certain escheat warrants were caveated in these cases upon the ground that certain lots included in them had previously been granted to the caveators, and which they had taken up as vacancy. These caveats wore resisted upon the ground that the title to such lots never passed to the caveators by their patents, but still remained in the state, and were, therefore, liable to he taken up by the eaveatees under their escheat warrants. Upon this question, the Chancellor delivered the following opinion :
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor:
It is unquestionably a general and well established rule of the land office, that no patent shall bo issued for any land for which a patent had been previously granted, so long as such patent remains in force ; and it is equally undeniable that exceptions to this general rule should he admitted with much caution. But notwithstanding this is the acknowledged principle, I feel constrained, in deference to the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case of Lee vs. Hoye, 1 Gill, 188, to consider these cases either as exceptions to the rule, or as not *30embraced within it, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lee v. Hoye's LesseeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1843
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gore v. ToddCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1926