Arnold v. Patrick
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in the first of these causes was filed to foreclose a mortgage given by W. Ricketson to Jonathan Ricketson, and assigned by the latter to Arnold, the complainant; in which bill Patrick and others were made defendants, as having some right or interest in the mortgaged premises. Patrick answered the bill, and the same was taken as confessed against the other defendants therein.
Read the full summary
The bill in the first of these causes was filed to foreclose a mortgage given by W. Ricketson to Jonathan Ricketson, and assigned by the latter to Arnold, the complainant; in which bill Patrick and others were made defendants, as having some right or interest in the mortgaged premises. Patrick answered the bill, and the same was taken as confessed against the other defendants therein. A cross bill was also filed by Patrick against Arnold, Howland Ricketson and S. Barker, claiming a preference in payment, out of the proceeds of the mortgaged premises, upon a mortgage given to him by H.…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The intention and effect of the stipulation between the solicitors'of the only two parties who have appeared in these causes, as I understand it, is, that the several matters stated or averred in the answer of Patrick to the original bill are to be taken as true, except so far as they are denied, put in issue or modified by the answer of Arnold to the cross bill; and that all the allegations and averments in the answer and further answer in the cross suit are to be taken as true. The facts of the case, therefore, so far as they are material to the determination of the rights of…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Chase v. . PeckNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Blewitt v. . BoorumNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Siemon v. . SchurckNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Snyder v. MartinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1880
- Wallace v. . BerdellNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.