Farmers' Bank of Alexandria v. Hooff

R. being indebted to the Farmers Bank of Alexandria, on certain promissory notes exceeding in amount one thousand dollars, conveyed to H. a lot of ground in Alexandria, exceeding one thousand dollars in value, devised to her by her husband, to secure the payment of the said notes by sale of the lot. R. claimed an estate in fee in the property conveyed to the trustee. The sum due to the bank was reduced by payments to less than one thousand dollars, and R. being deceased, a bill was filed by the bank to compel the trustee'to sell the property conveyed to him by R. for the payment of the balance of fhe debt. The circuit court decreed that It. held no other interest in the property than a life estate, and dismissed the bill. The complainants appealed. On a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, the debt remaining due to the bank being less than one thousand dollars, the amount required to give jurisdiction in appeals and writs of error from the circuit court of. the district of Columbia; it was held that the real matter in controversy was the debt claimed in the bill; and though the title of the lot might be inquired into incidentally, it does not constitute the object of the suit. The appeal was dismissed.

ON appeal from the circuit court of the United States of the district of Columbia for the county of Alexandria. In the circuit court of the county of Alexandria the appellants filed a bill setting forth that a certain Mary Resler being indebted to the Farmers Bank of Alexandria, as drawer of certain promissory notes,. amounting to one thousand.’ two hundred and sixty-seven dollars, which notes were renewed and were, afterwards reduced by payments, in order to secure the payment of the sum remaining due to the bank on the 10th of September 1823, made and executed a deed'to John Hooff, one of the defendants, by which certain real estate in the city of Alexandria was conveyed to him in trust to secure the payment of the amount due on the said notes. The title of Mary Resler to the property so conveyed, was derived from the will of her deceased husband; and the bill claims that she took a fee simple in the property, to Be defeated by her marrying again, and she having died without marrying, the property is liable to her debts The bill proceeds to state, that James Galt and others, also. appellees, contend that Mary Resler took, under the will of her husband, no more tnan a life estate in the property so conveyed in trust; and that John Hooff, the trustee, declines making a sale of the property to satisfy the debt- due to the appellants. The bill asks a discovery of the asserted title of the appellees, that the equity of redemption set up by the appellees may be foreclosed, and that the trustee be decreed to sell the premises. The bill also asks for an account from the administrator of Mary Resler. The answer of John C-alt, one of the appellees, denies the title of Mary Resler in the property conveyed by the deed of trust to have been a fee simple in her; and asserts that the fee in the same descended to the respondent and to his brothers, and asserts that Mary Resler took no more in the premises, under the will of her deceased husband, than an estate for life. The circuit court, being of opinion that Mary Resler took no more than an estate for life under the will of her deceased husband; and conveyed to the appellant, by the deed, no more than such an estate, dismissed the complainant’s bill. From this decree the appellants appealed to this court.