Appeals to the Privy Council
Report No. 04_1738_01

Jennings v Cuming

Maryland 

 

Case Name Short

Jennings v Cuming

 
Case Name Long

Edmund Jennings and John Gallaway v William Cuming Executor of Thomas Facer and Achsah Woodward Administrator de bonis non of Amos Garret

 
 

Acts of the Privy Council, Colonial Series

view_APC

APC Citation 

v.3 [455] p.619–620 – 30 November 1738 – entry 1

 
PC Register Citation 

George II v.6 (1 October 1738 – 27 March 1740) p.46: PC 2/95/46

view  

APC Citation 

v.3 [455] p.620 – 6 September 1739 – entry 2

 
PC Register Citation 

George II v.6 (1 October 1738 – 27 March 1740) p.301–302, 340–341: PC 2/95/301–302, 340–341

view  

Colonial Courts

Commissary General and Judge for the Probate of Wills – 30 August 1737

Court of Delegates – 25 October 1737

Participants

Cuming, William, esquire (executor of Thomas Facer)

Facer, Thomas, presumed deceased

Gallaway, John (attorney for William Woodward and Mary Holmes)

Garret, Amos, merchant, of Annapolis (deceased brother of Mary Woodward and Elizabeth Gwin)

Gwin, Elizabeth (deceased sister of Mary Woodward and Amos Garret)

Holmes, Mary (executor of Mary Woodward)

Jennings, Edmund, esquire (attorney for William Woodward and Mary Holmes)

Rudd, Sayer (executor of Elizabeth Gwin)

Seely, Edmund, gentleman (executor of Elizabeth Gwin)

Woodward, Achsah (administrator de bonis non of Amos Garret)

Woodward, Mary (deceased sister of Amos Garret and Elizabeth Gwin)

Woodward, William (executor of Mary Woodward)

Description

Validity of will of Amos Garret

Disposition

Dismissed for non-prosecution

Notes

Elizabeth Gwin was the sister of Amos Garret and Mary Woodward. (Skinner, Maryland Testamentary Abstracts 1736–1739, p.67) That relationship is noted in Participants. Her surname is spelled ‘Gwin’ in the APC and ‘Ginn’ in the Abstracts.

The APC is ambiguous as to whom Jennings and Gallaway were attorneys for. The Abstracts suggest that they were attorneys-in-fact for Woodward and Holmes as executors, Woodward and Holmes in their own names, and Rudd and Seely as executors, i.e., that they collectively represented all three pairs of parties against Cuming. The APC refers to ‘attorney’; however, the Abstracts refer to ‘attorney-in-fact’.

References in Smith, Appeals to the Privy Council from the American Plantations

Table of Cases (Jennings v Cumming)


DOCUMENTATION

Printed Cases

Not found

Privy Council Documents in PC 1 at The National Archives at Kew

Not found