Taylor & Warren v. Ferguson & Robertson
This text of 4 H. & J. 46 (Taylor & Warren v. Ferguson & Robertson) 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.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered by
It is the opinion of the court, that the relief prayed for in the bill of complaint in this case, is a matter not properly cognizable in a court of chancery, and that that court had no jurisdiction further than to compel the discovery which forms one of the objects of the bill; which being obtained, the complainants ought to be left to' their remedy at law. And therefore, without inquiring into the correct interpretation of the letters, which are alleged to have been written to the defendants by one of the' [54]*54complainants, or expressing any opinion as to their legal effect and operation, in which them would- be no propriety, being a subject proper for the consideration of another tribunal, the decree of the chancellor is affirmed.
DEGREE AIEIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 H. & J. 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-warren-v-ferguson-robertson-md-1815.