Legal Opinion

McDaniel v. Franklin Railway Supply Co.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided January 30, 1935PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor:

The defendant’s application for approval of a supersedeas bond is predicated on the assumption that the bond when approved will serve to stay all further proceedings pending the appeal. The complainants; being informed of the application, appeared and were heard in reference thereto. They raised three contentions. These are: (a) That an appeal does not as a matter of right operate to stay the operation of an interlocutory decree for an accounting, the question of a stay in such case being one that lies within the discretion of the Chancellor; (b) that the facts of this case are…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hart v. Mayor of AlbanyNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
  2. Tatem v. GilpinCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1816
  3. Green v. WinterNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
  4. Bradwell v. WeeksNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
  5. Messonier v. KaumanNew York Court of Chancery · 1817

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Powers v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1945
  2. Blaustein v. Standard Oil Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API