The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1900-04-21


The object of this suit is to procure the APP
pofntment of receiver to take charge of the
real estate of the late Michael Duffy situated in
in Baltimore county, and receive the rents.
profits and issues thereof under the direction of
Joseph Duffy, Ella Duffy, his wife. Michael
Duffy, Jr., Mary Prospect. and James Prospect.
her husband. and each of them and the agents
and servants of each of them, from interfering
or meddling with the said real estate and the
management and the control of the same
., Inc oili states that MICHAEL Duffy late Of Bal
timore county, State of Maryland, died on or
about February 18th. 1900 intestate leaving sur
SSiXXlng MIN widow, Celinda c. Duffy, and the
Following children. who are his heirs at law, to
wit: John l. Duffy, Monica DUFFY. infant
Ih0mas +. Duffy, infant; Alice G. Nelson, who
Is the wife of John s. Nelson of Baltimore city ),
ried James Prospect, both of whom are non-resi-
dents and supposed to reside in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania Michael Duffy, Jr., Joseph Duffy.
who married Ella Duffy, his wife. of baltimore
county. the said Mary Prospect, Michael Duffy,
Jr., and Joseph Duffy. being children by a for
nsr 9eceased wiIe OF said Michael Duffy, and
that at the time of his death the said Micihaef
Duhy was seized and possessed of large and
valuable real estate, situated near Mt. Washing
ton, in said county, containing in the aggregate
q acres, rood and l6 perches of land more or
less. improved by good dwelling house and all
necessary outbuildings; that the said Michael
Duty died in the said dwelling house on the
farm, 6eing the said real estate. and that at the
time OF his death the said Joseph Duffy and Ella
Duny, his wife, and their children and said
Michael Duffy, Jr., had been and are now re-
siding in said dwelling house on said farm that
John N. Littig. ESQ.,. on the 9Th day of March.
lsOO. produced before the Orphans Court of Bal
timoIe county a paper writing purporting to be
the last will and testament of the said Michael
Duny, for probate. but said alleged will was not
admitted to probate by said Court, and that said
John ]. Duffy, Monica Duffy. Thomas F. Dufry,
Allce " Nelson and John S. Nelson, her hus-
band, have filed caveat to said alleged will OBJ
Jectlng TO the probate of the same, alleging that
Ine sald paper, writing was not duly executed
AILGSte0 that If NE c pnf Tod n,vao f1
Mlchael Duffy when he was of sound mind and
capaole OF executing valid deed or contract
ana ai that the same was procured by undue in
nuence exercised and practiced on the said
Michael Duffy and the paper writing as afore-
said was not admitted to probate as the last will
OF Michael Duffy, but on said caveat issues were
framed by the Orphans Court of said county
and sent to the Circuit Court for Baltimore
county for trial, and the controversy over the
same is now pending and it will be long time
oetore said contention is terminated that the
said paper writing is not in fact the will of the
SAID Michael Duffy, and that it can or ought not
to have any force, validity or effect as such Wills
That IN view of said controversy, which may be
indefinitely protracted and the fact that the
salo larm and real estate is in good farming con-
dltlon and the buildings on the same are in good
repair; that unless someone who has authority
from this Court is appointed to care for and look
AFTER the same the said farm and buildings will
go to destruction and waste, and it is also abso-
lutely necessary that someone should look after
the insurance on the buildings.
mere is great deal of ill-feeling among the
heirs at law, and as one of the heirs at law, they
being tenants in common of the said property,
has as much right to the possession and manage
ment OF the said property as any other of the
heirs at law, there will always be conflicts and
contentious between the said heirsat law during
the said controversy as to the possession and
management of the said real estate. The prop
erty Will. Tor want of proper care and manage
ment, be very much depressed and deprecated
IN Value ana go TO waste, as no possible agree
ment can be made between the heirs at law as to
who will manage and control the same. The
damage that will be caused by the want of
proper care will be great and irreparable to the
interests of the parties concerned and especially
to the plaintiffs, and it is therefore necessary
tnat receiver be appointed to take charge of
and protect all the interests of the parties in
terested, including the rights of the said widow,
Celinda G. Duffy; that Joseph Duffy is now and
has been. since the death of said Michael Duffy,
in possession of said buildings and real estate,
but that he has no more right than any other of
the heirs at law of the said Michael Duffy; that
so long as the controversy over the alleged will
Is undetermined, gad Joseph Duffy and Ella
Duffy, his wife; Michael Duffy, Jr.. Mary Pros
peri and James Prospect. her husband. can have
no right title to the possession of the said real
estate any more than the other children who are
heirs at law of the said Michael Duffy.
y thsrefore this % Day Of
in each of four successive weeks before the 18th
day of May, 1900 give notice to the said Mary
Prospect and James Prospect. her husband. the
absent defendants, of the object and substance
of this bill, warning them to appear in person or
by solicitor in this Court,
On or before the 3Ist day of May 1900,
to show cause. if any they have, why decree
ought not to be passed as prayed.
' Il. 'BosLEY MERRYMAN, Clerk.
Apl. 7-5t.