Hogan v. . Hoyt
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
The appellant is mistaken in supposing that the judgment of foreclosure and the report of sale, are not "proceedings," in the court below. The authority of that court to amend them nunc protunc is clear. (Code, § 173.)
The question was one addressed to the discretion of the Supreme Court, and no facts appear in the papers to invest an appellate tribunal with authority to reverse its decision. We are bound to assume that the sale was fairly made; for that was settled in the court below, by an adjudication at the General Term, in which the appellant acquiesced. The question, whether the sale…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Produce Bank v. . MortonNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Ex parte McGeeOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Smith v. LongNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Rauth v. New York Elevated RailroadThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1893
- Dawley v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1873
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.