American Insurance v. Oakley
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application on the part of the Seneca County Bank to set aside an order made upon the appeal in this cause, upon the ground that the original application to the vice chancellor for a resale, and the appeal from his decision, had both been made in the name of the corporation without its authority or consent.
Read the full summary
This was an application on the part of the Seneca County Bank to set aside an order made upon the appeal in this cause, upon the ground that the original application to the vice chancellor for a resale, and the appeal from his decision, had both been made in the name of the corporation without its authority or consent. And a cross application was made on the part of the purchaser at the master’s sale to amend the order made upon the appeal, which had been settled ex parte, and by mistake was entitled in the name of a different corporation from that which was the complainant in this suit.…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The decree upon the appeal being wrongly entitled, it is a matter of course to amend it in that respect. But as it appears to have been settled ex parte, without giving the solicitor for the appellants an opportunity to propose amendments to the same, if it is wrong-in any other respect it must be corrected, so as to render it conformable to the decision of the court upon the appeal. In other words, to make it such a decree as the appellants and respondents were entitled to upon the facts of the case, consistently with the principles of that decision. Before settling the form…
2Cited by50 opinions
- Peterson v. . the Mayor, C., of New-YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Harshey v. BlackmarrSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- City of Davenport v. Peoria Marine & Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Hamilton v. . WrightNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Hooker v. . Eagle Bank of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.