Ford v. Belmont
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action to obtain a partition of certain real estate "between the plaintiff and the defendants, and was tried at the special term, where a judgment was rendered dismissing the complaint, with costs. After the cause was submitted, a motion was made hy the plaintiff to amend the complaint by inserting the names of the heirs of Matthew St. Clair Clarke, as defendants, which was • denied.
Read the full summary
This was an action to obtain a partition of certain real estate "between the plaintiff and the defendants, and was tried at the special term, where a judgment was rendered dismissing the complaint, with costs. After the cause was submitted, a motion was made hy the plaintiff to amend the complaint by inserting the names of the heirs of Matthew St. Clair Clarke, as defendants, which was • denied. The appeal is brought upon the judgment, and also from the order denying that motion. The facts, upon which the judgment was based, as found by Chief Justice Robertson, before whom the action was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Barbour, J.
As I understand this case, it stands thus:
First. The power of attorney, and the agreement between Bruen and Clarke) vested in the latter the entire equitable estate and ownership of the former in the premises, upon condition that the contemplated compromise should be affected; and that condition was complied with *520by the agreement to compromise, and the subsequent payment of §200,000 by the Dysons, under their agreement with Clarke.
Second. By Clarke’s agreement with the Dysons and Bruen’s deed to Dunbar S. Dyson, and the payment of the $200,000, D. S. Dyson became…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth Finance Co. v. LivingstonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1943
- Janney v. BrownSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1884
- State ex rel. Sauve v. Judge of the Third District CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1868