5. If a release of errors be pleaded to a s?!persedeas, and found for the defendant in error; the judgment should be, not that the judgment of the Court below be af firmed, but that the plaintiff be barred of his writ of supersedeas. Ibid. 6. See ATTORNEY, NO. 2. 7. Error, in a judgment at law, however palpable, is no ground for the interference of a Court of Chancery; but, to entitle the party to relief, there must be some special grounds of equity. See EQUITY, No. 9. ERROR, CORAM NOBIS. 1. The death of the lessor of the plaintiff, previous to the judgment in ejectment, is no ground for a writ of error coram nobis ; notwithstanding that circumstance was not stated in the record, and no security for costs was given; because an ejectment does not abate by the death of the lessor of the plaintiff." Purvis v. Hill614. ESTIMATION. 1. What deficiencies the vendor of a tract of land, who conveys it by estimation, will be bound to make good-what not. See PURCHASER, Nos, 2, 3. EVICTION. See DEFICIENCY. PURCHASER. EVIDENCE. 1. What proof is requisite to authorise the reading of a deposition taken de bene esse. See DEPOSITIONS, No. 1. Minnis v. Echols 31. 2. An appraisement of the estate of a deceased person, not signed by the execu tor or administrator, but by the appraisers only, is no inventory of the estate, and cannot be given in evidence as such. Carr's Ex'r v. Anderson-361. 3. Quere. Whether, to authorise the giving an inventory and appraisement in evidence, it must have been admitted to record, as well as signed by the executor or administrator, and by the appraisers? Ibid. 4. How far inventories and appraisements are evidence. See INVENTORY, No; 3. Ibid. 5. How far a verdict shall be evidence between the parties, or their privics. See VERDIGT, No. 1. 6. In what case the evidence of Jurors will be received in a Court of Equity, to declare the motives which induced them to find excessive damages. See EQUITY, 7. No evidence in opposition to the Sheriff's return of "no effects" on an execution, in favour of the assignee of a bond against the obligor, can be admitted to prove that the obligor was not insolvent. Goodall v. Stuart-105. How to prove exhibits at the hearing. See EXHIBITS. 8. In tracing a pedigree, in a suit for freedom, what a witness swore to on the executing of a writ of inquiry between the mother of the plaintiff and another per son, may be given in evidence to prove the said mother to have been descended from a female Indian ancestor, although the name of that witness be not particu larly recollected, nor the witness himself positively known to be dead; it being proved, by the witness stating the sub stance of bis testimony, that he was a very old man when he gave his evidence; that he believed him to be dead; and had endeavoured in vain, as counsel for the plaintiff, to find a witness to prove the same point to which he had testified. Pegram v. Isabell-193. 9. The record of the verdict and judgment upon a writ of inquiry, in a suit by the mother of the plaintiff against a third person, in which record the ground of the judgment does not appear, may be given in evidence to prove that the mother had recovered her freedom; not that she was entitled to it, "by reason of being de"scended in the maternal line from an "Indian ancestor imported into this State "since the year 1705." But the ques tions, upon what ground the judgment in that suit was rendered, and whether the descendant was born after the mother acquired her right to freedom, or not, ought to be left open. Ibid. 10. On the trial of an issue upon the assumpsit of the testator, an assumpsit of his execu for cannot be given in evidence to esta blish the demand. Quarles's Adm'x v. Tattlepage & Co.-401. 11. See ANSWER IN CHANCERY, No. S. 12. What is the usual and proper kind of evi dence on the trial of an issue directed by a Court of Chancery. See Issues Our OF CHANCERY, No. 1. 13. See DEPOSITION, No. 4. 14. See PARTNERS, NO. 2. 15. A judgment ought not to be reversed on 16. the ground that improper evidence, offered to the Jury by the appellant, was admitted by the inferior Court, where it ap pears that such evidence did not influence the verdict. Fuulcan, Adm'r of Humlin, v. Harriss-550. The mere admission of a debt is not suffiçient to charge the defendant with the whole demand of the plaintiff, who must, nevertheless, prove the amount. Quarlet's Adm'x v. Littlepage & Co.-401. 1. On a decree against an executor or administrator for a balance due on his administration account, how execution is to be issued. See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS, No. 4. Barr v. Barr's Adm'r 26. 2. Money bona fide lent to a Sheriff, and applied by him to his own use, prior to his receiving a writ of fieri fucías against the lender, is not liable to satisfy such execu tion, either at law, or in equity; notwithstanding the same money was origi nally deposited in his hands as a pledge for certain purposes. Price v. Crump -89. 3. Although the condition of a forthcoming bond did not recite on whose property the execution was levied, yet it was deemed neither informal nor defective. Lewis v. Thompson, Scott & Haskins-100. 4. The Sheriff's return of "no effects," upon an execution in favour of the assignee of a bond against the obligor, is sufficient to charge the assignor, so that no proof that the obligor was not insolvent can be admitted. Goodall v. Stuart -105. 5. Construction of the act of the 19th of January, 1802, authorising Clerks to issue writs of venditioni exponas. See VENDITIONI EXPONAS. 6. A party may, without any previous notice, move the Court to direct an excention to be issued, (where the Clerk refuses to issue one,) or to quash an execution ; and it will be so far considered a cause depending, that either party may take an appeal from the decision of the Court on such motion. The Commonwealth v. Hewitt-181. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 1. After a judgment against an exccutor, and a return of "no effects" on an execu tion against the goods and chattels of his testator, a suit in equity may be brought for a discovery of the assets; to which suit the securities of the executor, and all other persons, (however remotely concerned in interest,) against whom a deeree can be rendered, ought to be made defendants. Clarke v. Webb and others -8. 2. An executor or administrator ought to be eredited in his administration account for fees paid to counsel, notwithstanding those fees were more than the law allow ed. Lindsay v. Howerton-9. 3. See AccoUNT, No. 1. Campbell and Wife v. Winston, &c.-10. 4. A decree and execution thereupon against an executor or administrator, for a ba- 5. In such case an attorney's fee ought to be taxed in the bill of costs. Ibid. 6. A still, not fixed to the freehold in a house which might be injured by its removal, is personal property, and goes to the executor, not to the heir. Crenshaw and others v. Crenshaw's Ex'r and others 22. 7. An excenter is not entitled to commis: sions for delivering bonds payable to his testator to the legatees, nor for turning such bonds into mortgages, and delivering the mortgages. Hipkins v. Bernard, Er'r of Hipkins-21. 8. The executors of the mortgagor ought not to be parties in a bill to foreclose. Graham's Ex'rv. Carter-6. 9. The right of a purchaser, at public auction, from an executor, of slaves specifically bequeathed by the testator, cannot be disturbed by the legatees, whether the sale was necessary for the payment of debts, or not, unless it be proved that the purchaser knew there were no debts to render such sale necessary; the remedy of the legatee being, otherwise, against the executor only. Neither can such purchaser himself compel the executor to rescind the contract. Sale v. Roy-69. 10. If an executor sells the slaves of his testator when there are no debts to render such sale necessary, and buys them himself, the sale may be set aside at the instance of any person interested. Anderson & Starkev. Fox, &c.-245. An executor having sold certain slaves which were specifically bequeathed by his testatrix; having beconic the purchaser himself: and, afterwards, rera 11. 5. If a release of errors be pleaded to a su persedeas, and found for the defendant in error; the judgment should be, not that the judgment of the Court below be af firmed, but that the plaintiff be barred of his writ of supersedeas. Ibid. 6. See ATTORNEY, No. 2. 7. Error, in a judgment at law, however palpable, is no ground for the interference of a Court of Chancery; but, to entitle the party to relict, there must be some special grounds of equity. See EQUITY, No. 9. ERROR, CORAM NOBIS. 1. The death of the lessor of the plaintiff, previous to the judgment in ejectment, is no ground for a writ of error coram nobis ; notwithstanding that circumstance was not stated in the record, and no security for costs was given; because an ejectment does not abate by the death of the lessor of the plaintiff." Purvis v. Hill 614. ESTIMATION. 1. What deficiencies the vendor of a tract of land, who conveys it by estimation, will be bound to make good-what not. See PURCHASER, Nos, 2, 3. EVICTION. See DEFICIENCY. PURCHASER. EVIDENCE. 1. What proof is requisite to authorise the reading of a deposition taken de bene esse. See DEPOSITIONS, No. 1. Minnis v. Echols - 31. 2. An appraisement of the estate of a deceased person, not signed by the execu tor or administrator, but by the appraisers only, is no inventory of the estate, and cannot be given in evidence as such. Carr's Er'r v. Anderson-361. 3. Quere. Whether, to authorise the giving an inventory and appraisement in evidence, it must have been admitted to record, as well as signed by the executor or administrator, and by the appraisers? Ibid. 4. How far inventories and appraisements are evidence. See INVENTORY, No; 3. Ibid. 5. How far a verdict shall be evidence between the parties, or their privics. See VERDICT, No. 1. 6. In what case the evidence of Jurors will be received in a Court of Equity, to declare the motives which induced them to find excessive damages. See EQUITY, 7. No evidence in opposition to the Sheriff's return of "no effects" on an excention, in favour of the assignee of a bond against the obligor, can be admitted to prove that the obligor was not insolvent. Goodall v. Stuart-105. How to prove exhibits at the hearing. See EXHIBITS. 8. In tracing a pedigree, in a suit for freedom, what a witness swore to on the executing of a writ of inquiry between the mother of the plaintiff and another per son, may be given in evidence to prove the said mother to have been descended from a female Indian ancestor, although the name of that witness be not particu larly recollected, nor the witness himself positively known to be dead; it being proved, by the witness stating the sub stance of bis testimony, that he was a very old man when he gave his evidence; that he believed him to be dead; and had endeavoured in vain, as counsel for the plaintiff, to find a witness to prove the same point to which he had testified. Pegram v. Isabell-193. 9. The record of the verdict and judgment upon a writ of inquiry, in a suit by the mother of the plaintiff against a third person, in which record the ground of the judgment does not appear, may be given in evidence to prove that the mother had recovered her freedom; not that she was entitled to it, "by reason of being de"scended in the maternal line from an "Indian ancestor imported into this State "since the year 1705." But the questions, upon what ground the judgment in that suit was rendered, and whether the descendant was born after the mother aequired her right to freedom, or not, ought to be left open. Ibid. 10. 11. 12. On the trial of an issue upon the assumpsit of the testator, an assumpsit of his execu tor cannot be given in evidence to esta blish the demand. Quarles's Adm'r v. Littlepage& Co.-401. See ANSWER IN CHANCERY, No. S. What is the usual and proper kind of evi dence on the trial of an issue directed by a Court of Chancery. See Issues our OF CHANCERY, No. 1. 13. See DEPOSITION, No. 4 14. See PARTNERS, NO. 2. 15. A judgment ought not to be reversed on the ground that improper evidence, offered to the Jury by the appellant, was admitted by the inferior Court, where it ap pears that such evidence did not influence the verdict. Faulcon, Adm'r of Hamlin, v. Harriss-550. 16. The mere admission of a debt is not suf ficient to charge the defendant with the whole demand of the plaintiff, who must, nevertheless, prove the amount. Quarlett Adm'x v. Littlepage & Co.-401. 17. When a partner cannot be a witness for another partner, in a suit relating to the copartnership. Waggoner v. Gray's Adm'rs-603. 18. The books of account of a party ought to be taken altogether, debits as well as credits. Ibid. 19. Under what circumstances parol, admissible to explain a written agreement. See SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. EXCEPTIONS, BILL OF. See BILL OF EXCEPTIONS. EXCEPTIONS TO A MASTER COMMISSIONER'S REPORT. 1. When the Court of Appeals will not enter into an investigation of an account taken by direction of a Court of Chancery, unless exceptions to the master's report be there taken, in a particular manner. See ACCOUNT, No. 6. EXECUTION. 1. On a decree against an executor or administrator for a balance due on his administration account, how execution is to be issued. See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS, No. 4. Barrv. Barr's Adm'r-26. 2. Money bona fide lent to a Sheriff, and applied by him to his own use, prior to his receiving a writ of fieri facias against the lender, is not liable to satisfy such execu tion, either at law, or in equity; notwithstanding the same money was origi nally deposited in his hands as a pledge for certain purposes. Price v. Crump -89. 3. Although the condition of a forthcoming bond did not recite on whose property the execution was levied, yet it was deemed neither informal nor defective. Lewis v. Thompson, Scott & Haskins-100. 4. The Sheriff's return of "no effects," upon an execution in favour of the assignee of a bond against the obligor, is sufficient to charge the assignor, so that no proof that the obligor was not insolvent can be admitted. Goodall v. Stuart -105. 5. Construction of the act of the 19th of January, 1802, authorising Clerks to issue writs of venditioni exponas. See VENDITIONI EXPONAS. 6. A party may, without any previous notice, move the Court to direct an exeention to he issued, (where the Clerk refuses to issue one,) or to quash an execution; and it will be so far considered a cause depending, that either party may take an appeal from the decision of the Court on such motion. The Commonwealth v. Hewitt-181. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 1. After a judgment against an exccutor, and a return of "no effects" on an execution against the goods and chattels of his testator, a suit in equity may be brought for a discovery of the assets; to which suit the securities of the executor, and all other persons, (however remotely concerned in interest,) against whom a deeree can be rendered, ought to be made defendants. Clarke v. Webb und others -8. 2. An executor or administrator ought to be credited in his administration account for fees paid to counsel, notwithstauding those fees were more than the law allowed. Lindsay v. Howerton-9. 3. See ACCOUNT, No. 1. Campbell and Wife v. Winston, &c.-10. 4. A decree and execution thereupon against an executor or administrator, for a balance due on his administration account, should not be against the goods and chattels of the decedent in his hands to be administered, but against his own goods and chattels. Burr v. Barr's Adm' 26. 5. In such case an attorney's fee ought to be taxed in the bill of costs. Ibid. 6. A still, not fixed to the freehold in a house 7. An executor is not entitled to commis: sions for delivering bonds payable to his testator to the legatees, nor for turning such bonds into mortgages, and delivering the mortgages. Hipkins v. Bernard, Ex'r of Hipkins-21. 8. The executors of the mortgagor ought not to be parties in a bill to foreclose. Graham's Ex'r v. Carter6. 9. The right of a purchaser, at public auction, from an executor, of slaves specifically bequeathed by the testator, cannot be disturbed by the legatees, whether the sale was necessary for the payment of debts, or not, unless it be proved that the purchaser knew there were no debts to render such sale necessary; the remedy of the legatee being, otherwise, against the executor only. Neither can such purchaser himself compel the executor to rescind the contract. Sale v. Roy-69. 10. If an executor sells the slaves of his testator when there are no debts to render such sale necessary, and buys them himself, the sale may be set aside at the instance of any person interested. Anderson & Starkev. Fox, &c.—245. 11. An executor having sold certain slaves which were specifically bequeathed by his testatrix; having become the purchaser himself; and, afterwards, reen 5. If a release of errors be pleaded to a 8persedeas, and found for the defendant in error; the judgment should be, not that the judgment of the Court below be af firmed, but that the plaintiff be barred of his writ of supersedeas. Ibid. 6. See ATTORNEY, NO. 2. 7. Error, in a judgment at law, however palpable, is no ground for the interference of a Court of Chancery; but, to entitle the party to relief, there must be some special grounds of equity. See EQUITY, No. 9. ERROR, CORAM NOBIS. 1. The death of the lessor of the plaintiff, previous to the judgment in ejectment, is no ground for a writ of error coram nobis ; notwithstanding that circumstance was not stated in the record, and no security for costs was given; because an ejectment does not abate by the death of the lessor of the plaintiff." Purvis v. Hill614. ESTIMATION. 1. What deficiencies the vendor of a tract of land, who conveys it by estimation, will be bound to make good-what not. See PURCHASER, Nos, 2, 3. EVICTION. See DEFICIENCY. PURCHASER. EVIDENCE. 1. What proof is requisite to authorise the reading of a deposition taken de bene esse. See DEPOSITIONS, No. 1. Minnis v. Echols 31. 2. An appraisement of the estate of a deceased person, not signed by the execu tor or administrator, but by the appraisers only, is no inventory of the estate, and cannot be given in evidence as such. Carr's Ex'r v. Anderson--361. 3. Quere. Whether, to authorise the giving an inventory and appraisement in evidence, it must have been admitted to record, as well as signed by the executor or administrator, and by the appraisers? Ibid. 4. How far inventories and appraisements are evidence. See INVENTORY, No: 3. Ibid. 5. How far a verdiet shall be evidence between the parties, or their privics. See VERDICT, No. 1. 6. In what case the evidence of Jurors will be received in a Court of Equity, to declare the motives which induced them to find excessive damages. See EQUITY, 7. No evidence in opposition to the Sherif“a return of "no effects" on an excention, in favour of the assignee of a bond against the obligor, can be admitted to prove that the obligor was not insolvent. Goodall v. Stuart-105. How to prove exhibits at the hearing See EXHIBITS. 8. In tracing a pedigree, in a suit for freedom, what a witness swore to on the executing of a writ of inquiry between the mother of the plaintiff and another per son, may be given in evidence to prove the said mother to have been descended from a female Indian ancestor, although the name of that witness be not particu larly recollected, nor the witness himself positively known to be dead; it being proved, by the witness stating the sub stance of his testimony, that he was a very old man when he gave his evidence; that he believed him to be dead; and had endeavoured in vain, as counsel for the plaintiff, to find a witness to prove the same point to which he had testified. Pegram v. Isabell-193. 9. The record of the verdict and judgment upon a writ of inquiry, in a suit by the mother of the plaintiff against a third person, in which record the ground of the judgment does not appear, may be given in evidence to prove that the mother had recovered her freedom; not that she was entitled to it, "by reason of being de"scended in the maternal line from au "Indian ancestor imported into this State "since the year 1705." But the ques tions, upon what ground the judgment in that suit was rendered, and whether the descendant was born after the mother aequired her right to freedom, or not, ought to be left open. Ibid. 10. 11. 12. On the trial of an issue upon the assumpsit of the testator, an assumpsit of his erect tor cannot be given in evidence to est blish the demand. Quarles's Adm'x v. Littlepage& Co.-401. See ANSWER IN CHANCERY, No. S. What is the usual and proper kind of evi dence on the trial of an issue directed by a Court of Chancery. See IsSUES OUT OF CHANCERY, No. 1. 13. See DEPOSITION, No. 4 14. See PARTNERS, NO. 2. 15. A judgment ought not to be reversed on 16. the ground that improper evidence, offered to the Jury by the appellant, was an mitted by the inferior Court, where it ap pears that such evidence did not influence the verdict. Faulcon, Adm'r of Hamlin, v. Harriss-550. The mere admission of a debt is not sufficient to charge the defendant with the whole demand of the plaintiff, who must, nevertheless, prove the amount. Quarket't Adm'a v. Littlepage & Co.-401. |