Jones v. Berry

Delaware Orphan's Court

Jones v. Berry

2 Del. Cas. 542, 1820 Del. LEXIS 6

DecidedMarch 9, 1820

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Del. Cas. 542 (Jones v. Berry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Orphan's Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones v. Berry, 2 Del. Cas. 542, 1820 Del. LEXIS 6 (Del. Ct. App. 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor

said that Berry was entitled to a reasonable compensation for the maintenance of this child. That though his wife had some estate, yet Berry was under no obligation to maintain him, and now that this money or part of it has fallen to this child by the first husband, it was not more than equitable that Berry should be allowed for his maintenance; for if the land sold to Coston had been retained, Berry would have been tenant by the curtesy, and the children of the wife would have had nothing till after his death. This money was raised from that land sold, and the child, is now able to pay. He referred to 1 Bro.C.C. 208 and East [-] ² and said that was without this equitable circumstance in favor of Berry. He was of opinion that Berry ought to receive reasonable satisfaction. The account was corrected by striking out the charges for interest and for commissions, and by reducing the maintenance for the four first years to thirty-two dollars per annum.

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

The Chancellor

said that Berry was entitled to a reasonable compensation for the maintenance of this child. That though his wife had some estate, yet Berry was under no obligation to maintain him, and now that this money or part of it has fallen to this child by the first husband, it was not more than equitable that Berry should be allowed for his maintenance; for if the land sold to Coston had been retained, Berry would have been tenant by the curtesy, and the children of the wife would have had nothing till after his death. This money was raised from that land sold, and the child, is now able to pay. He referred to 1 Bro.C.C. 208 and East [-] ² and said that was without this equitable circumstance in favor of Berry. He was of opinion that Berry ought to receive reasonable satisfaction. The account was corrected by striking out the charges for interest and for commissions, and by reducing the maintenance for the four first years to thirty-two dollars per annum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Del. Cas. 542, 1820 Del. LEXIS 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-berry-delorphct-1820.