Legal Opinion

Murray v. De Rottenham

New York Court of Chancery

Decided March 10, 1822PublishedCited by 11 opinions

THE original bill was filed in 1820, by Joh R. Murray, (trustee for the defendant, Charles, Count Re Rotten-ham and others,) and the executors, heirs, and devisees of John Murray, deceased, against Robert M‘Menomy, and Jacob Mark, as defendants. The bill was, afterwards, amended, by making Louis Mark, Moretz Mark, Charles, Count Re Rottenham, J. G. Sarasin, and J. P. Leerse, parties defendants.

Read the full summary

THE original bill was filed in 1820, by Joh R. Murray, (trustee for the defendant, Charles, Count Re Rotten-ham and others,) and the executors, heirs, and devisees of John Murray, deceased, against Robert M‘Menomy, and Jacob Mark, as defendants. The bill was, afterwards, amended, by making Louis Mark, Moretz Mark, Charles, Count Re Rottenham, J. G. Sarasin, and J. P. Leerse, parties defendants. Jacob Mark, afterwards, died, and a bill of revivor and supplement was filed, making Rosetta Mark, the acting executrix of Jacob Mark, a defendant, with the surviving defendants. From the pleadings,…

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

This case has been argued with much ability, and .the points raised admit of some latitude of discussion; but they have been rendered quite embarrassing by the complicated nature of the facts, and the distressingly voluminous documents in which they are involved,

1. The first point is, whether Mark continued bound by his personal covenants in the trust deed to Murray, after his discharge as a bankrupt.

His debt of 40,000 dollars to Count De Rotienham and others, contracted in Germany in 1796, and payable there, was a debt which “ might have been proved” under Ms commission of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Frost v. CarterNew York Supreme Court · 1799

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Andrews v. HerriotNew York Supreme Court · 1825
  2. People v. . Metropolitan Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1912
  3. Voigtlander v. BrotzeTexas Supreme Court · 1883
  4. McDougall v. PageSupreme Court of Vermont · 1882
  5. Rhodes v. BordenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API