Hosack v. Rogers
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the chancellor for hearing upon the pleadings and proofs. The facts in the case, so far as they are necessary to understand the decision, are stated in his opinion and in the previous reports of the case in this court, and in the court for the correction of errors.
Read the full summary
This case came before the chancellor for hearing upon the pleadings and proofs. The facts in the case, so far as they are necessary to understand the decision, are stated in his opinion and in the previous reports of the case in this court, and in the court for the correction of errors. Nehemiah Rogers, as executor, must be decreed to account for all the assets of his testator, A. Gracie, according to a legal course of administration as the law was prior to 1830. The assignment and release of the 27th April, 1824, did not change the original indebtedness of A. Gracie, whether consisting of…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
This case has frequently been before the court in various shapes, and the facts upon which the principal question between the complainants and Nehemiah Rogers, the surviving executor of Archibald Grade, as to the right of priority of payment rests, are stated in the reports of the case in this court, and in the court for the correction of errors. (6 Paige’s Rep. 415, and 18 Wendell’s Rep. 319) It is not necessary, therefore, to recapitulate them here. As the court for the correction of errors decided that there was no specific appropriation of the French fund for the payment of…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Frink v. GreenNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Guichard v. BrandeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Collier v. FieldMontana Supreme Court · 1872
- Line & Nelson v. Nelson & SmalleySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1876
- Spycher v. WernerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.