Hyatt v. Dusenbury
New York Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
The conveyances, second mortgage, and the assignment thereof, were all valid as between the parties thereto. Hence, in case this judgment could be reversed, and this plaintiff defeated, the surplus money which has been paid to him would belong to William W. Dusenbury as administrator and would have to be refunded to him. None of these defendants would be entitled to one cent thereof. Therefore they have no interest in this appeal. They are not aggrieved by the judgment and cannot appeal therefrom. Code, § 1294. William W. Dusenbury, as administrator, is the only person interested in…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Bowen v. . New York Central Railroad Company.New York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Mills v. HoagNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Cuyler v. MorelandNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Platt v. . PlattNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Matter of Watson v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.