United States ex rel. Balch v. Rose
27 F. Cas. 895, 3 D.C. 174, 3 Cranch 174
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia·Decided May 15, 1827·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The Couht, (Morsell, J., not sitting,) was clearly of opinion that the executor is not liable upon his bond, for neglect of the duty stated in the replication, until that duty shall have been established in the mode pointed out in the Maryland Testamentary Act of 1798, c. 101, § 20, cl. 8.
Judgment for the defendant upon the demurrer.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States ex rel. Balch v. Rose, 27 F. Cas. 895, 3 D.C. 174, 3 Cranch 174 (circtddc 1827).
27 F. Cas. 895 (United States ex rel. Balch v. Rose) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Faw v. Roberdeau's
7 U.S. 174 (Supreme Court, 1805)