Maryland case law › Seeger v. Hunting

Seeger v. Hunting

78 Md. 54 (1893) · Maryland Court of Appeals
Maryland Court of AppealsDisposition: AffirmedBriscoe, J.✓ Good law
HoldingThis case involved a bill for specific performance of a contract for the sale of a house and lot on Charles Street in Baltimore.

Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This case is a plain one, and presents no difficult questions for our consideration. The bill was filed for the specific performance of a contract, for the sale of a house and lot on Charles street, in the City of Baltimore. The recoi’d shows that John G-illingham, of Baltimore, died, leaving a will dated the 6th day of June, 1848, duly executed to pass real estate, which contains this clause: “I give and devise to my friends, Edward Jessop, Thomas Russell, and Benjamin Rush Roberts, and the survivors and survivor of them, and the heirs, executors, and administrators of the survivor, all my estate, effects and property, in trust, nevertheless, for the uses and purposes hereinafter mentioned, that is to say: In trust that the same be preserved and kept together, and any portion thereof that may be in cash vested in ground 56 rents, or placed out at interest on good mortgage security of real or leasehold property, from time to time so that my beloved wife, Mary Gillingham, during the residue of her natural life, if she so long remains my widow, be permitted and suffered to hold, use, occupy, and enjoy the same, and the rents, interest and profits thereof, to receive, take, and applj1- to her own use and benefit, and her receipts alone shall be good and effectual acquittances and discharges for such rents, interest and profits; and from and immediately after the decease of my said wife, or her intermarriage with any other person, whichever shall first happen, then in trust, that my daughter, Mary G. Tyson,' if she is then living, he permitted and suffered to hold, use, occupy and enjoy the same estate and property during the residue of her natural life, and the rents, interest, and profits thereof to receive, take, and apply to her own separate use and benefit, without being subject to the control, power, or disposal of her present or any future husband, or liable for the payment of his debts, or bound for the fulfilment of his contracts or engagements; and the receipts of the said Mary G., whether she be sole or covert, shall be good and sufficient releases and discharges for such rents, interest, and profits; and from and after the decease of my said daughter, Mary G., or in case of her decease before my said beloved wife, then from and immediately after the death of the latter, in trust, that the said principal estate shall go to and become the property of the child my said daughter now has, and the child or children she may hereafter have, his, her or their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns forever, if more than one, to be equally divided between them as tenants in common, share and share alike; the issue of any deceased child of my said daughter, if any such issue there should be living, to take and have the part or share only to which the parent of such issue would, if living, 57 be entitled.

And in tbe event of tbe decease of any of the children of tbe said Mary G.. under age, and without issue living at the time of his, her, or their respective deaths, the part or share of him, her or them so dying shall go to the survivors or survivor of them, and the heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns of such survivors or survivor, and to the issue then living of any deceased child or children, and the heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns of such issue, said issue to take the share or shares to which such deceased child or children would, if living, be entitled.” It appears from the final account that the executors under the will distributed to the trustees personal property, including cash, to the amount of $17,758, and of this

This is a preview of Seeger v. Hunting. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.