The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1900-04-07
Neru Advertisements.

building, 30 East Leringfon Street.
baltimore, Md, and 1oscs0n. Md.
ORDER OF PUBLICATION.
JOHN ]. DUFFY,
MONICA DUFFY, INFANT,
BY HER NEXT FRIEND,
JOHN !. DUFFY, In he
THOMAS F. DUFFY,
INFANT, BY HIS NEXT
ALICE G, NELSON. AND Circuit Cont
JOHN S. NELSON.
HER HUSBAND
PLAINTIFFS, for
JOSEPH puffy IF
ELLA DUFFY,
HIS WIFE, Baltimore County,
M MiGHYA Pko RPEFg' JR,.
JAMES PROSPECT,
HER HUSBAND. AND in Fouify
CELINDA e. DUFFY,
DEFENDANTS.
The object of this suit is to procure the ap-
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
the Court. and for an injunction restraining
Joseph Duffy, Ella Duffy, his wife, Michael
Duffy, Jr., Mary Prospect. and James Prospect,
and servants of each of them, from interfering
or meddling with the said real estate and the
The states that cbae d ae 81
timore county. State of Maryland, died on or
about February 18th, 1900. intestate leaving sur-
viving 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
IS the wife of John s. Nelson, of Baltimore city :
Mary Prosperi formerly Mary Duffy who mar
ried James Prospect, both of whom are non-resl-
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 for
w n soil OhaoI nx,(rx,
not children of his last wife, Celinda G. Duty |;
thatat the time of his death the said Michael
Duly was seized and possessed of large and
valuable real estate, situated near Mt Washing
ton, in said county, containing in the aggregate
Il acres. rood and l6 perches of land, more or
less. improved by good dwelling house and all
necessary outbuildings; that the said Michael
Duffy died in the said dwelling house on the
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 NJ. 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 theasaid Michael
Duffy, for probate. but said alleged will was not
admitted to probate by said Court, and that said
9h ne pMS fyoD Monica onS d R1y Thomas Nedo Duffy
band, have filed caveat to said alleged will OBJ
jecting to the probate of the same, alleging that
and attested; that it was not exec uted 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
fiuence 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
before said contention is terminated that the
said Michael Duy and that It can fn or ought
to have any force, validity or effect as such will
that in view of said controversy, which may be
sad e ana sne Iaer ohat 6ne
dition and the buildings on the same are in good
repair; that unless someone who has authority
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.
There 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 heirs at law during
the said controversy as to the possession and
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 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
W pldlHIluss anu IL Is Iuer0IOrc 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 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. gaid Joseph Duffy and Ella
Duffy, his wife; Michael Duffy Jr.. Mary Pros
peri and James Prospect. her husband. can have
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
1t is therefore this I'd day of April. 1900, or
/ dorod by tho Circuit Court @
ty, in equity that the plainted IN some news
copy OF this order to be inserore county, on 9e
in each Of give notice to the said Mary aF
1Fp fXosperi and James Prospect. Ter nusDanu. Ine
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 Nag, 1900
to show cause, if any they have, why adecree
| ought not to be passed as prayed.
N. CHARLES BURKE,
| True Copy.-Test:
n. BOSLEY MERRYMAN, Clerk.
Apl. 7.-5t.