The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1900-04-14
Eena1 Mnticss.

The object of this suit is to procure the ap-
pointment of a 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
the Court, and for an Injunction restraining
Joseph Duffy, Ella Duffy his wife Michnel
Duffy, Jr., Mary Prospect and James Prosneri
her husband. and each of them and the agents
and servants of each of them, from interfering
management and the control of the same.
The bill states that Michael Duffy, late of Bal
timore county. State of Maryland, died on or
about February 18th, 1900, intestate leaving sur
viying him widow, Celinda c. Duffy, and the
following children, who are his heirs at law, to
wit: John |. Duffy, Monica Duffy, infant;
Thomas +. Duffy, infant; Alice c. Nelson, who
il the wife of John S. Nelson, of Baltimore city;
Mary Prospect formerly Mary Duffy, who mar
ried James Prospect, both of whom are on-resi-
dents and supposed to reside in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania; Michael Duffy, Jr, Joseph Duffy,
who married Ella Duffy, his wife. of baltimore
Jr., and Joseph Duffy. being children by for.
mer deceased wife of said Michael Duffy and
not children of his last wife, Celinda c. Duffy:
that at the time of his death the said Michael
Duffy was seized and possessed OF 7Hfrv yuf
valuable real estate, situated near Mt Washing
ton, in said county, containing in the aggregate
II acres. rood and 16 perches of land, more or
less. improved by good dwelling house and all
necessary outbuildings that the said Michael
farm, being the said real estate, and that at the
time of his death the said Joseph Duffy and Ella
Duffy, 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,
1900. produced before the Orphans Court OF Bal
timore county paper writing purporting to be
the last will and testament of the said Michael
Duffy, for probate. but said alleged will was not
admitted to probate by said Court, and that said
John |. Duffy, Monica Duffy, Thomas +. Duffy,
Alice G. Nelson and John s. Nelson, her hus-
band have filed a caveat to said alleged will OBJ
jecting to the probate of the same, alleging that
the said paper writing was not duly executed
and attested; that it was not executed by said
Michael Duffy when he was of sound mind and
capable OF executing valid deed or contract.
and that the same was procured by undue in
fuence, exercised and practiced on the said
Michael Duffy and the paper writing as afore-
| said was not admitted to probate 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
before 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 such will
that IN view OF said controversy, which may be
indefinitely protracted. and the fact that the
said farm and real estate is In good farming con-
dition 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 Ii Is also absO-
lutely necessary that someone should look after
the insurance on the buildings.
There is great deal of il-feeling among the
heirs at law, and as 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 heirs at law during
the said controversy as to tie possession ana
management of the said real estate. The prop
erty will, for want of proper care and manage
ment, be-very much depressed and deprecated
in value and 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 or
| proper care will be great and irreparable to the
interests of the parties concerned and especially
to the plaintiffs, and it is therefore necessary
that 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 nov and
has been. since the death of said Michael Duny
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; thai
so long as the controversy over the alleged will
is undetermined, said Joseph Duffy. and Elld
Duffy, his wife; Michael Duffy. Jr.. Mary Pros
peri and James Prospect. her husband. can have
No right or title to the possession of the said rea
estate any more than the other children who are
heirs at law of the said Michael Duffy.
1t Is therefore this I'd day of April. 1900, or
dered by the Circuit Court for BaltiWQre EeAn