Hoyt v. Sheldon
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an order denying a motion for leave to file a supplemental order. This action was commenced by Jesse Hoyt against Abraham G. Thompson, The Long Island Bailroad Company, and others, in the month of December, 1847. It was brought to recover a debt originally contracted by The Long Island Bailroad Company in favor of the Morris Canal and Banking Company.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order denying a motion for leave to file a supplemental order. This action was commenced by Jesse Hoyt against Abraham G. Thompson, The Long Island Bailroad Company, and others, in the month of December, 1847. It was brought to recover a debt originally contracted by The Long Island Bailroad Company in favor of the Morris Canal and Banking Company. The latter Company, being indebted to the State of Michigan, in December, 1840, assigned this debt, and others owing to it, to that State, as security for, or in part payment of, what it then owed to that State. It is alleged that…
1Concurrence
Hoffman, J.,
after stating the facts.—While I concur in the result announced in this case, I have been led to my conclusion by reasons somewhat different from those stated, though not inconsistent with. them. They are briefly these.
The application, being in an equity suit, is to be governed by the analogous practice in a Court of Chancery.. That practice, in relation to facts occurring subsequently to issue joined, or to facts discovered subsequently, was in one of two modes. It was either by a supplemental answer, to file which leave was asked; or by a cross bill, in the nature of a plea…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Smith v. SmithNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- Tuffs v. GibbonsNew York Supreme Court · 1839