Garr v. Bright
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from, a decretal order of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, allowing the demurrer of the defendants, Bright & Palmer; and dismissing the complainant’s bill, as to them, with costs.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from, a decretal order of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, allowing the demurrer of the defendants, Bright & Palmer; and dismissing the complainant’s bill, as to them, with costs. The bill was filed by the complainant, as the administrator of Colin Mitchell, deceased, against the trustees of The Apalachicola Land Company, and the receivers of The Morris Canal and Banking Company; to establish the complainant’s claim to four hundred and seventy three shares of the stock of the Apalachicola Land Company, and to obtain a transfer to him of the said stock, or to compel…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It is not necessary, upon this appeal, to examine the question at length as to the right of the complainant, in such a suit as this, to make the state of Indiana a party defendant. No question on this subject arises under the constitution of the United States. The eleventh article of the amendments to that constitution, declares that the judicial power of the United States shall not extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States, by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state. The courts of the United…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Ex parte GreeneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
- Briggs v. Light-Boat Upper Cedar PointMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1865
- Strong v. StrongThe Superior Court of New York City · 1865
- Baeck v. MeinkenNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Baeck v. MeinkenNew York Supreme Court · 1900
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.