About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

James A. Abbott and Hannah K., his Wife, Demandants and Plaintiffs in Error, v. The Essex Company, Tenants U.S. 202 (1856)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0203 and id is 1 raw text is: 202 SUPREME COURT. Abbott et ux. v. Essex Company. The case of Forgay et al. v. Conrad, 6 How. 201, was an ap- peal from an interlocutory decree, which was sustained, though objected to. But this deoision was made under the peculiar circumstances of that case. The decree was, that certain deeds should be set aside as fraudulent and void; that certain'lands and slaves should be delivered up to the complainant; that one of the defendants should pay a certain sum of money to the complainant; that the complainant should have execution for these several matters; that the master should take an account of the profits of the lands and slaves, and also an account of certain money and notes, and then said decree concluded as follows, viz.: And so much of said bill as contains or relates to matters hereby referred to the master for a report, is retained for further decree in the premises, &c. It will be observed, that two deeds for lots in New Orleans were declared to be null and void, and certain slaves owned by Forgay, one of the appellants, were directed to be sold on exe- cution, as also the real estate and the proceeds distributed among the bankrupt's creditors; and if the defendants principally in- terested could not take an appeal until the return of the master, their property, under the decree, would have been disposed of beyond the reach of the appellate court, so that an appeal would be useless. This was the principal ground on which the appeal was sustained, although it was stated that this part of the decree was final. The court say: The decree upon these matters might and ought to have awaited the master's report; and when the ac- counts were before the court, then every matter in dispute might have been adjudicated in one final decree ; and if either party thought himself aggrieved, the whole matter would be brought here and decided in one appeal, and the object and policy of the acts of congress upon this subject carried into effect. The decree before us is not final, consequently it must be dis- missed. JAMES A. ABBOTT AND HANNAH K., ms WIFE, DMIANDANTS AND PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE ESSEX COmPANY, TENANTS. The following clause in a will, namely: I give to my two sons, viz. John and Jacob, all my lands, &c., live stock, &c., tools, &c., bonds, &c., to be equally divided be- tween them, and the executor is ordered to pay debts out of that part of the estate. Item. -It is my will that if either of my said sons, John and Jacob, should happen to die without any lawful heirs of their own, then the share of him who may tirst decease shall accrue to the other survivor and his heirs, gave an estate in fee sim- ple to John and Jacob, and the share of the one who first died without issue passe over to the other son by way of executory devise.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most