Hoffar v. Stonestreet

6 Md. 303
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedDecember 15, 1854
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 6 Md. 303 (Hoffar v. Stonestreet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hoffar v. Stonestreet, 6 Md. 303 (Md. 1854).

Opinion

Tuck, J.,

delivered the opinion of this court, in the first case, as follows:

The appellants filed their petition in the orphans court of Charles county, praying to have corrected an allowance of commissions made to the appellee as executor of Catharine Stonestreet.

We cannot express any opinion as to the propriety of this allowance, for the reason, that the appellants do not appear to have any interest in the estate. The will is not exhibited, nor is there any allegation or proof, that the petitioners are the same persons indicated in the will as the children of the sister of the testatrix. We must decide the case without reference to the reason assigned by the court below. If they have erred, which we do not mean to intimate, the parties claiming a reversal of their order must appear to have a standing in court, and to have been injured by the proceedings below.

Appeal dismissed with costs.

In the second case, the same judge delivered the opinion of this court, as follows:

The parties in this case appear to be the same as in the preceding. Although the petition was filed for a different purpose the same objection applies to both records.

The will of Catharine Stonestreet does appear in this record -r but the petition does not aver, nor is there evidence to show, that they are the legatees,, and that there was any balance of-the estate to be held and disbursed by the appellee, under her' will. We decline expressing any opinion as to the question of jurisdiction of the orphans courts in such cases.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State ex rel. Ashby v. Haddock
140 So. 2d 631 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)
Collins v. Cambridge Maryland Hospital, Inc.
148 A. 114 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1930)
In re the Five Councilmanic Appeals
4 Balt. C. Rep. 663 (Baltimore City Court, 1928)
Johnston v. Willis
127 A. 862 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1925)
Martien v. Crystal
111 A. 820 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1920)
Reilly v. Dougherty
60 Md. 276 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1883)
Munnikhuysen v. Magraw
57 Md. 172 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1881)
Cecil v. Cecil
19 Md. 72 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1862)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 Md. 303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoffar-v-stonestreet-md-1854.