Winans v. Dunham
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the New-York circuit in September, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the New-York circuit in September, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges. The defendant was the endorser of a promissory note for $2000, made by David R. Dunham and held by the plaintiff On the trial, the defendant offered to prove that forty-five shares of Williamsburgh ferry stock had been pledged to the plaintiff by the drawer of the note, as security for the payment of the debt in question, and that it was agreed between the parties that if the defendant should pay the debt, the stock should be transferred to her;…
1Opinion of the Court
*48 By the Court,
Marcy, J.
The decision of the chancellor iff conclusive upon the rights of the parties here. It was objected that it did not appear that the decree had been duly enrolled. I apprehend that an enrolment is not necessary to give validity to a decree, or to make it evidence in a court of law. The case of Wilson fy Gibbs v. Conine, 2 Johns. R. 280, does not establish the doctrine that an enrolment must be shewn, to make a decree evidence. The court decide against a decretal order awarding an execution, reciting a prior decree. The order reciting the substance of the prior decree was…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Mercein v. People ex rel. BarryNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Bates v. DelavanNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Mutual Life Insurance v. NewtonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1888
- Gilmore v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1873
- Lynch v. Rome Gas Light Co.New York Supreme Court · 1864
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.