Haywood v. Judson
New York Supreme Court
In Equity. The bill in' this cause was filed for the partition of land. The premises consisted of a farm in the town of Hillsdale, containing 329 acres. The plaintiff was the owner •of fifty-four one hundred and tenth parts, and the six defendants were owners of the remaining fifty-six parts, in different proportions.
Read the full summary
In Equity. The bill in' this cause was filed for the partition of land. The premises consisted of a farm in the town of Hillsdale, containing 329 acres. The plaintiff was the owner •of fifty-four one hundred and tenth parts, and the six defendants were owners of the remaining fifty-six parts, in different proportions. A referee, under the usual order for that purpose, reported that the premises were so situated that an actual partition thereof could not be made among all the owners thereof, according to their respective rights, without prejudice to the interests of all except the plaintiff;…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Harris, J.
Partition between tenants in common of real property is a matter of right, by the common law as well as by statute. (Smith v. Smith, 10 Paige, 470.) Courts of equity have also a general concurrent jurisdiction with courts of law in all cases of partition, at common law, as well as by statute. (Story’s Eq. Juris. § 658. 2 R. S. 329, § 79.) And in cases of partition, a court of equity does not act merely in a ministerial character, and in obedience to the call of the parties, who have a right to the partition, but, acting upon its general jurisdiction, as a court of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smith v. SmithNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lucas v. PetersIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Godwin v. BanksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1899
- Collins v. CollinsNew York Supreme Court · 1891
- Moore v. Hatfield, New York County Courts1911
- David v. DavidNew York Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.