Champlin v. Parish
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the chancellor upon appeal, from the decree of the late assistant vice chancellor of the first circuit. The facts were the same as in the case of Champlin & Jones v. Haight & Herring, as reported in 10 Paige's Rep. 274, except that the terms and conditions of the sale were not reduced to writing, and signed by the parties; which in that case the answer of the defendant Haight admitted had been done.
Read the full summary
This case came before the chancellor upon appeal, from the decree of the late assistant vice chancellor of the first circuit. The facts were the same as in the case of Champlin & Jones v. Haight & Herring, as reported in 10 Paige's Rep. 274, except that the terms and conditions of the sale were not reduced to writing, and signed by the parties; which in that case the answer of the defendant Haight admitted had been done. The same decree, however, was made by the assistant vice chancellor in this case, as in that. The defendant Parish appealed from the whole decree; and the complainants…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The questions which arose and were considered by this court, in the case of these complainants against Haight and Henry, having been settled by the court for the correction of errors, upon appeal from my decision in that case, they are not open for examination here. And if no other questions were presented by the pleadings and proofs in the present case, it would be the duty of this court to make a decree in conformity with the decision of the court of dernier resort. In that case there was no difference of opinion, between this court and the court for the correction of errors,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- M'Crea v. PurmortCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1836
- Harris v. KnickerbackerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1830
- Clason v. BaileyCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1817
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ide v. LeiserMontana Supreme Court · 1890
- Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Newton v. . BronsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- James v. . PattenNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
- Haydock v. . StowNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.