Rosenthal v. Mahon

Robinson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. There is not much in this appeal, either in its legal aspect or in any other aspect, to commend it to the favorable consideration of the Court. The facts out of which the controversy arises may be briefly stated as follows: — • Thomas Dorney, a lunatic, died in the early part of the year 1882, leaving an estate of about one hundred thousand dollars. Before his death, Rosenthal the appellant, who was his committee, made a contract with one Noah Lemmon and five other persons, claiming to be the heirs of Dorney, by the terms of which, Rosenthal was to establish their right to the estate, and in consideration of his services was to receive fifteen per cent, on the assessed value of the estate.

In other words, they were to pay him fifteen thousand dollars, if he succeeded in establishing their claim to the estate. Shortly Rl'ter the execution of this contract, Dorney died, and some litigation followed as to who were his heirs and next-of-kin, which resulted however in favor of the parties represented by Rosenthal; and letters of administration on Dorney’s estate were granted to Rosenthal, Caroline F. Carter, one of the distributees, and Francis Carter, her husband. In January, 1882, a bill was filed for the sale and division of Dorney’s real estate among the six distributees represented by Rosenthal. In all these proceedings the ⁴²⁰ rights of Pool, the appellee, who lived in Pennsylvania, and who was a half-brother of Noah Lemmon, and one of the heirs of Dorney, were entirely ignored.

In June, however, while the bill for the sale and division of the real estate was pending, he made a visit to his half-brother, Noah Lemmon, then living in Baltimore, and while there, made some inquiry about Dorney’s estate, the reply to which was very indefinite, and without the slightest intimation by Noah, of the proceedings for its sale and division between himself and others, to the exclusion of Pool. In the fall of that year, Carter, the husband of one of the distributees, and himself one of the administrators of Dorney, made a visit to Pool, in company with Mr. Cox, a lawyer of Washington. Carter told Pool, that he was one of Dorney’s heirs, and as such was entitled to a one-seventh of his estate, that Noah Lemmon and others had filed a bill to divide the property among themselves, that they denied his, Pool’s relationship to Dorney, and there would be great difficulty in establishing his claim to the estate. A great deal more was said, which it is unnecessary to repeat; it is sufficient to say, that Carter induced Pool to sign a contract agreeing to give him, Carter, one-third of Pool’s share in consideration of services to be rendered by Carter, in making good Pool’s claim as one of the heirs-at-law of Dorney.

Shortly after the execution of this contract, Cox, the attorney, wrote to Rosenthal, stating he represented Pool, who claimed a one-seventh interest in Dorney’s estate. A petition was also filed by Cox in the Orphans’ Court, asking that letters of administration on Dorney’s estate be granted to