Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1927-04-15

The object of this suit is have the de-
PENDANTS convey certain property in Mont
somery county. Maryland. to the plaintiff
and to reform and correct deed from the
defendants to the plaintiff, dated October
IL, 1925.
The bill in substance states that the plaintiff
and defendants are all residents Of the Dis
trict Of Columbia. and both Of the defendants
are unmarried. That prior to the 22nd day
Of September, 1928, the plaintiff entered
into negotiations for the purchase of GER
tain land in Montgomery county, Mary
land, from the defendant. KatheTyn E. Fox,
who was the owner Of the same said
premises being known as 100 East Thorn
apple Street. Chevy Chase. Maryland, and
described more particularly as Lot fifteen
Q5) and sixteen Q6) and East twenty
three (23) feet front by the full depth
thereof OF Lot seventeen Q7). In Block No.
l, in the subdivision known as Ottobourne,
which comprises a plot Of ground one
hundred and twenty-three Q2S) feet by
one hundred and twenty-five Q25) feet
In dimensions. more or less. That said
premises comprise dwelling house and
the ground, all Of which ground was and
still Is enclosed and used In connection
with said house and enclosed by a hedge,
which has marked the boundary Of the
property for many years. The defendant
through her AGENTS, stated to the plaintiff
that the property fronted approximately
one hundred and twenty-five (125) feet
on Thornapple Street. and the agents and
representatives Of the said defendant
stepped off the property and explained to
the complainant that the property extend
ed so far on one side Of the dwelling that
II would be possible to erect another
building on the so feet facing on Thorn
apple Street
That plaintiff pursuant to said negOtia-
tons and because Of the representations
made as to the size OF the lot entered into
contract to acquire the property. which
contract was signed by the defendant Fox
and the plaintiff certified copy Of which
Is filed with the bill that In said contract
the property was described as 106 East
Thornapple Street. being taxed as parts
Of Lots sixteen (l6) and seventeen Q7)
in Block one ~, Otterbourne Section of
Chevy Chase, Maryland, said lots fronts
one hundred and twenty-five Q25) feet on
East Thornapple Street and running to a
depth Of one hundred and twenty-three
Q23) feet, but through inadvertence and
mistake on the part of the plaintiff and
defendant Fox, they failed in said contract
to include Lot fifteeen Q5). which contains
considerable portion Of the property
fronting on Th0rnapple Street. although
by the other portion of the other description
said lot was included.
That plaintiff did not notice the failure
to include Lot fifteen (15) In the contract.
property. giving a copy Of the contract to
COmnQnu Of
the Title Company your complainant closed
said contract and fully executed all the
provisions thereof on his part to be per-
formed and accepted anc placed of record
a deed from said defendant conveying to
him the said property. which complainant
thought and believed comprised the entire
plot, that said deed instead Of containing
all Of the property purchased by him.
through mistake and inadvertence de-
scribed the property as parts Of Lots six
teen (l6) and seventeen az and omitted
Lot fifteen (l5) and the East ten U0) feet
front by the full depth Of Lot sixteen (16)
so that the property actually conveyed to
the complainant was only SO feet on
Thornapple Street. copy Of which deed
Is filed with the bill.
That shortly thereafter defendant For
discovered that said deed did not include
Lot fifteen Q5) and part Of Lot sixteen Q6)
whereupon she fraudulently and wrong.
fully executed and recorded deed to tn,
defendant. Charles 7. Penn. conveying the
said Lot fifteen Q5) and the East ten no
feet front Of Lot (l6) by the full deptl
thereof. q certified copy of which deed II
filled with the bill, that the defendant
Penn was merely title holder Of Lot A.
teen (15) and East ten Q0) feet of Loi
sixteen l6), that he paid nothing for II
and has no interest therein, and in EQUITY
Is mere trustee of the title to the said
lot for the benefit Of this plaintiff, and
should be required by tn Court to convey
the title thereof to the complainant. That
since the date Of said conveyance to him
the plaintiff has been In possession of en-
tire property and no effort has been made
by said Penn to take possession thereof.
The bill then prays that the defendants
be required and enj0ined to convey and
cause to be conveyed to the plaintiff title
to the said Lot fifteen Q5) and East ten
Q0) feet Of said Lot sixteen Q6) by the
full depth thereof, and that the said deed
be reformed and corrected so as to insert
therein the correct description of the
property purchased by the plaintiff and
for general relief.
II Is thereupon this 18th day Of March.
A. D. 1927. ordered by the Circuit Court
for Montgomery county. as Court Of
equity. that the plaintiff by causing a
copy Of this order to be inserted In some
newspaper printed and published in said
Montgomery county. once in each Of four
successive weeks before the 23rd day OF
April. A. D. 1927. give notice to the said
Katheryn E. Fox and Charles T. Penn. who
are residents of the District Of Columbia
and non residents Of the State Of Mary
land. Of the object and substance Of this
bill. warning them to appear 10 this Court
in person, or by solicitor on or before the
18th day Of May. A. d. 1927. to show
cause. II any they have, why decree
ought not TO be passed as prayed.