Clowes v. Dickenson
New York Court of Chancery
THE bill, filed February 26th, 1817, stated that Jacoby I. Vanderheyden, deceased, and Catharine, his wife, being seized in fee of two lots of land, (Nos. 241 and 242) in Troy, conveyed the same by deed, dated September 10th, 1810, to the plaintiff, in fee, for the consideration of one thousand dollars, with covenant of warranty.
Read the full summary
THE bill, filed February 26th, 1817, stated that Jacoby I. Vanderheyden, deceased, and Catharine, his wife, being seized in fee of two lots of land, (Nos. 241 and 242) in Troy, conveyed the same by deed, dated September 10th, 1810, to the plaintiff, in fee, for the consideration of one thousand dollars, with covenant of warranty. That on the 5th of September, 1810, a judgment, by confession, was entered up against J. I. V., in favour of John Kimberly, for 2,013 dollars 54 cents, debts and costs. That on the 27th March, 1811, G. fy H. Vail recovered a judgment against J. /, V. for 203 dollars…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
When the plaintiff purchased his two lots of Vanderheyden, the residue of the real estate of F. was, in equity, first chargeable with the burden of payment of the prior judgment of Kimberly. If the owner of the judgment had attempted to enforce it against the two lots of the plaintiff, he would undoubtedly have been directed by this Court, upon due application, to have levied the judgment debt upon the lands remaining unsold by V., -because it was the proper debt of F., and he ought to pay it/ The creditor would have been entitled, in equity, to have resorted tti *240the lots of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gill v. LyonNew York Court of Chancery · 1815
3Cited by9 opinions
- Iglehart v. WessonIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
- Bowie v. MinterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
- Nailer v. StanleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1823
- Hunt v. MansfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1863
- Moore v. TrimmierSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.