Legal Opinion

Frazer v. Consolidated Novelty Co.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided February 1, 1929PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor :

Whatever the practice may have formerly been with respect to the necessity of confirmation of sale before the purchaser could be held liable for damages incident to a re-sale which his default rendered necessary, the case of Camden v. Mayhem, 129 U. S. 73, 9 S. Ct. 246, 32 L. Ed. 608, is a clear authority for the proposition that, under facts such as we have here, confirmation of the sale by the court is not a pre-requisite to the defaulting purchaser’s liability. In that case, however, it is to be noted that one fact existed which is absent here. I refer

*250to the fact that the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Camden v. MayhewSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Griel v. RandolphSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  3. Cowper v. Weaver's Admr.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Frazer v. Consolidated Novelty Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1929
  2. Hegarty v. American Commonwealths Power Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API