Hunt v. Wallis
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the court upon two appeals by the complainant upon orders considered as entered with the clerk of the first circuit; and also upon an application to dismiss both appeals under the following circumstances. The bill and notice of the order to answer were served on the 29th of December.
Read the full summary
This case came before the court upon two appeals by the complainant upon orders considered as entered with the clerk of the first circuit; and also upon an application to dismiss both appeals under the following circumstances. The bill and notice of the order to answer were served on the 29th of December. On the 8th of February, after the time for answering had expired, the defendant’s solicitor obtained from the vice chancellor a chamber order extending the time for answering thirty days; which order was served the same day upon the law partner of the complainant’s solicitor. But the chamber…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It is not very material to the rights of the parties whether this cause is disposed of upon the appeals from the orders as originally entered, or upon the motion to dismiss the appeals in connection with the c 'leías amended by the vice chancellor to conform to his decision. The result in either case will be the same, as the order drawn up by the complainant’s solicitor is not erroneous, even in the form in which he thought fit to enter it. A chamber order granted by an injunction master, or by a vice chancellor out of court, giving further time to answer, is a mere nullity if…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Bailey v. TaaffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Kaufman v. ShainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Garcie v. SheldonNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Ross v. GriffinMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Wallace v. FieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.