In re Hemiup
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application, under the provisions of the revised statutes, to rectify certain irregularities in the sale of real estate.
Read the full summary
This was an application, under the provisions of the revised statutes, to rectify certain irregularities in the sale of real estate. (Vide % Paige’s R. 817, 8. C.) Upon hearing the parties, the court referred it to a master to enquire and report whether any, and what debts were due from the decedent, and whether he left sufficient property to pay those debts; and if he did not leave sufficient property for that purpose, the master was then directed to report what amount of personal property he did leave which came to the hands of the administratrix; whether he left any real estate other than…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chaecellor.
The master has entirely mistaken his duty in reporting the evidence to the court, when it was referred to him to draw certain conclusions of fact. When the *307court refers it to a master to examine and report as to the existence of non-existence of a fact, or as to any other matter, it is his duty to draw the conclusion from the evidence produced before him, and to report that conclusion only. And it is irregular and improper for him to set forth the evidence in his report, without the special direction of the court. If either party is dissatisfied with the conclusion at which the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Dean v. EmersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Greene v. BishopU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1858
- Kinsey v. KinseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1861
- Lincoln v. EatonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Sloan v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.