Burgess v. Smith
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal, by the defendant, from an order of the late vice chancellor of the first circuit, denying an application to dissolve an injunction. The bill upon which the injunction was granted, was a bill of discovery merely; in aid of the prosecution of a replevin suit, instituted by the complainants against Allen, in the court of common pleas for Suffolk county in Massachusetts.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal, by the defendant, from an order of the late vice chancellor of the first circuit, denying an application to dissolve an injunction. The bill upon which the injunction was granted, was a bill of discovery merely; in aid of the prosecution of a replevin suit, instituted by the complainants against Allen, in the court of common pleas for Suffolk county in Massachusetts. It appeared, from the bill, that the goods for which ■the replevin suit was brought were obtained from the complainants by false pretences, and a conspiracy to defraud them out of the value of such goods. The…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
This court has jurisdiction, and will entertain a bill of discovery in aid of the prosecution of a civfr suit, in a sister state, or in a foreign tribunal, or in a court of the United States. And if this was such a case, the bill would *280not be bad upon demurrer; although the court might not consider it proper to restrain the defendant from proceeding to trial, in the suit in Massachusetts, in the meantime. But I do not see how any discovery, which may be made by the defendant in this suit, can aid the complainants in the prosecution of the replevin suit, against Allen, in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Williams v. HardenNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
3Cited by14 opinions
- Cole v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Post & Co. v. Toledo, Cincinnati, & St. Louis RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- E. B. Latham & Co. v. Mayflower IndustriesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
- Freick v. HinklySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Mutual Benefit Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.