Toppan v. Heath
New York Court of Chancery
This was a motion to dissolve an injunction on bill and answer. A difficulty having arisen between the parties relative to the contract for building the Arcade, in the city of New York, they submitted the same to arbitrators, and agreed that the submission should be made a rule of the Court of Common Pleas in that city.
Read the full summary
This was a motion to dissolve an injunction on bill and answer. A difficulty having arisen between the parties relative to the contract for building the Arcade, in the city of New York, they submitted the same to arbitrators, and agreed that the submission should be made a rule of the Court of Common Pleas in that city. On the 31st of May, 1827, the arbitrators made an award against Toppan for the payment of $2,202 89, of which he received a duplicate the following day from one of the arbitrators. A suit was afterwards commenced by Heath to recover the amount of the award, whereupon the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor :—It appears by the answer of the defendant, that at the next term after making the award, the complainant applied to the New York Common Pleas to set aside the same, in pursuance of the provisions of the statute; and that afterwards, upon hearing the case upon the merits, the application was denied, with costs. This allegation in the answer not being responsive to any thing contained in the bill, I have not taken it into consideration on this *motion, but have considered the question as if the complainant had neglected to apply to that court for relief.
The principles on which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Van Cortlandt v. UnderhillCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1819
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bissell v. MorganNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Fudickar v. Guardian Mutual Life InsuranceThe Superior Court of New York City · 1874