Van Hook v. Throckmorton
New York Court of Chancery
These cases came before the chancellor upon an appeal from a decision of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, refusing a writ of assistance to put the respondent Thomas Hegeman out of possession of certain leasehold premises in the city of New-York, and of a planeing mill and other machinery thereon.
Read the full summary
These cases came before the chancellor upon an appeal from a decision of the vice chancellor of the first circuit, refusing a writ of assistance to put the respondent Thomas Hegeman out of possession of certain leasehold premises in the city of New-York, and of a planeing mill and other machinery thereon. The appellant was a purchaser under a mortgage foreclosure, of an undivided portion of the premises, in the last of the above causes, and the assignee of Van Hook was the purchaser of another undivided portion of the premises, under a foreclosure in the first entitled cause.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There are two objections to the appellant’s application to turn the respondent out of possession of the share of the premises embraced in the mortgage *34of Tremells. Although the respondent Hegeman went into possession of the premises subsequent to the commencement of the suit, he did not enter under any person who was a party to that suit, or under any one who had derived title to or gone into the possession of the premises under a party, subsequent to the commencement of that suit. He purchased from Wilson who was in possession and claimed to be the absolute owner of the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Emerick v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1902
- State ex rel. Chappell v. GilesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Gelpeke v. Mil. & Horicon R. R.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Mason v. York & Cumberland RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1861
- Brown v. MarzyckSupreme Court of Florida · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.