Gleason v. Gage
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, allowing a demurrer and dismissing the complainants’ bill with costs.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, allowing a demurrer and dismissing the complainants’ bill with costs. From the bill it appeared that R. Rowley, in April, 1837, recovered a judgment against the defendant in the common pleas for $225; that Rowley caused an execution to be issued on the judgment against the property of the defendant, which was returned unsatisfied, and that the day after the return of the execution the complainants purchased the judgment of Rowley and took a written assignment thereof by deed. The bill, which was filed about a month…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The vice chancellor has undoubtedly based his decree in this case upon his reported decision in the case of Wakeman v. Russell, (1 Edw. Ch. Rep. 509.) I think, however, he has in both cases misapprehended the spirit and intent of the statutory provision upon the subject of creditors’ bills. The object of the revisers and of the legislature was not to establish, as a technical rule, that the execution should have been taken out by the same individual who filed the bill. But it was to establish and declare the great principle decided by the court for the correction of errors, in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wakeman v. RusselNew York Court of Chancery · 1833
3Cited by11 opinions
- Holland v. . GroteNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Ross v. ClussmanThe Superior Court of New York City · 1850
- Sammis v. Wightman ex rel. MarcherSupreme Court of Florida · 1893
- Orr's CaseNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Rankin v. RothschildMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.