Legal Opinion

Disbrow v. Henshaw

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors

Decided September 15, 1826PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the court of chancery. On the 4th of June, 1823, the respondents, Mary Henshaw and Christiana Eliza Humble, without notice to the appellant, presented their petition to Kent, • (then chancellor,) entitled thus: “ In the matter of the petition of Mary Henshaw, (late Mary Humble,) of the age of 21 years and upwards, and of Christiana Eliza Humble, an infant of the age of 14 years and upwards, on behalf of themselves and their brothers, J. H. Humble, J. 0. Humble,…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the court of chancery. On the 4th of June, 1823, the respondents, Mary Henshaw and Christiana Eliza Humble, without notice to the appellant, presented their petition to Kent, • (then chancellor,) entitled thus: “ In the matter of the petition of Mary Henshaw, (late Mary Humble,) of the age of 21 years and upwards, and of Christiana Eliza Humble, an infant of the age of 14 years and upwards, on behalf of themselves and their brothers, J. H. Humble, J. 0. Humble, A. L. Humble and L. K. Humble, who are also infants under the age of 14 years ; and also on behalf of Andrew Francis,…

1Opinion of the Court

[Sutherland, J.

Undoubtedly that is the practice of the court. I remember several applications to dismiss appeals, or parts of appeals for lateness of time, or other facts showing that the appellant was irregular.]

*The second appeal was to relieve us from the doubt whether we might appeal on the question of costs alone; there being no doubt that we may object to costs when connected with other matters. If the question of time be taken into view, then we deny that the order appealed from was interlocutory. It was upon the merits; and therefore is to be esteemed final in its character, within…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Codwise v. GelstonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1812
  2. M'Vickar v. WolcottCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1808

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lee v. LeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
  2. In re Guardianship of KleinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  3. In re the Guardianship of PierceNew York Supreme Court · 1856
  4. Benson v. SiemonsNew York Supreme Court · 1915
  5. McCann v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1848

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API