Anderson v. Hammond
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Court of Chancery. This appeal which was argued for the appellant only, with the preceding one, was similar in its circumstances with that: The appellee married Elisabeth Jinn Shipley, another daughter of James Shipley, to whom on the 3d August, 1841, he made another conveyance of a slave called Miranda. The appellee claimed also under a gift, from J. S., to his daughter made in 1835, at which time S. was not, indebted.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Chancery. This appeal which was argued for the appellant only, with the preceding one, was similar in its circumstances with that: The appellee married Elisabeth Jinn Shipley, another daughter of James Shipley, to whom on the 3d August, 1841, he made another conveyance of a slave called Miranda. The appellee claimed also under a gift, from J. S., to his daughter made in 1835, at which time S. was not, indebted. The Chancellor (Bland) also decreed a perpetual injunction in this cause, prohibiting the appellants as creditors of J. S., from proceeding to recover their…
1Opinion of the Court
Martin J.,
delivered the opinion of this court.
With respect to the validity of the bill of sale of the 3d of August, 1841, this case cannot be distinguished from that of Thomas C. Worthington and Isaac C. Anderson against Mary E. Shipley, already determined. The voluntary conveyance of the 3d of August, 1841, must be held fraudulent and void under the statute of 13 Eliz. for the reasons assigned in the case to which we have referred.
In this case, however, the bill alleges, that Miranda, the slave in question, was verbally given, at the period of her birth, which was about the year 1835, by…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Nickerson v. NickersonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1868