Ritchie v. Munder

Stewart, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. It appears from the proceedings in this case, that George R. Dodge conveyed to Charles F. and Lewis F. Munder, the lot of ground in question; that Charles F. Munder, devised all his property to his wife, Priscilla R. Munder, during her natural life, and after her death to his five children, Fannie, Charles, William, Caroline and Norman Munder, all of whom are infants under the age of twenty-one years. That Lewis F. Munder devised to his wife, Elizabeth, all his property during her natural life, and after her death to his two children, Maurice P. and Jane Catharine Munder, who has intermarried with J. William Middendorf. That the said Elizabeth, Maurice and Jane, with her husband, on the 15th of June, 1875, executed a mortgage ¹² of all their interest in the property to Thomas H. Hanson, to secure the payment of $12,000, and on the 15th of January, 1876, executed another mortgage on the same to J. Henry Snyder, to secure the payment of $4500.

That the said Elizabeth and Maurice P. Munder, trading as O. F. Munder & Brother, by deed of assignment of 21st February, 1876, conveyed to the appellants all their property in trust, for the benefit of their creditors, according to the terms of the said deed. The bill was filed by these trustees for the sale of the property, alleging that it is not susceptible of equitable division ; and that it would be advantageous to the parties to have the same sold and the proceeds divided. Priscilla R. Munder and her children the appellees, deny in their answer to the bill, that the property was incapable of equitable division ; and that it would be advantageous to the parties interested, to have the same sold and the proceeds thereof divided ; and that the complainants have any such interest therein as entitles them to institute such a proceeding as this, and to have a decree passed for the sale of the property. From the proof in the record it seems, that the lot of ground in question, is improved by a warehouse, entirely covering the same, and is subject to a ground rent, and that it