New Jersey Zinc Co. v. New Jersey Franklinite Co.
New Jersey Court of Chancery
The history of these cases will be found in the opinion of the Chancellor, in 13 New Jersey Chancery Reports (2 Beasley, page 322) which was delivered at February term, 1862. On the 24th of April, 1862, the New Jersey Zinc Company presented to the Chancellor a petition for a rehearing, setting forth that, by the supplemental bill filed by the Boston Franklinite Company, they claimed title to the mines and mining privileges in dispute under the decree of this court on the…
Read the full summary
The history of these cases will be found in the opinion of the Chancellor, in 13 New Jersey Chancery Reports (2 Beasley, page 322) which was delivered at February term, 1862. On the 24th of April, 1862, the New Jersey Zinc Company presented to the Chancellor a petition for a rehearing, setting forth that, by the supplemental bill filed by the Boston Franklinite Company, they claimed title to the mines and mining privileges in dispute under the decree of this court on the foreclosure of a mortgage given by the New Jersey Franklinite Company, the defendants in the original suit, to Oakes Ames,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
A rehearing in equity rests in the discretion of the court. Mills v. Banks, 3 P. W. 8; Travis v. Waters, 1 Johns. Ch. R. 48.
It is not by the courts of this country regarded so much a matter of course as it is in the English practice. Land v. Wickham, 1 Paige 256; Decarters y. La Farge, Ibid. 574; Field v. Schieffelin, 7 J. C. R. 256; Daniel v. Mitchell, 1 Story 198; Walsh v. Smyth, 3 Bland 27.
But the court always inclines to grant it upon the usual certificate of counsel, if upon the matters stated in the petition there is apparent ground for apprehending that an error has been…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Daniel v. MitchellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1840
- Land v. WickhamNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
3Cited by1 opinion
- Barnett v. Schickerling Products Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1932