Bloodgood v. Clark
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from the decision of a vice chancellor, denying an application, on the part of the complainants, for the appointment of a receiver of the property and effects of the defendants, upon a creditor’s bill filed against them.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from the decision of a vice chancellor, denying an application, on the part of the complainants, for the appointment of a receiver of the property and effects of the defendants, upon a creditor’s bill filed against them. Upon the hearing of the appeal, the counsel for the respondents, in addition to the papers furnished by the appellant, as required by the rules of the court, offered to read certain affidavits which had not been used, or marked as used, or filed With the clerk, upon the hearing of the motion as to which the appeal was brought. It appeared by the affidavit…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The affidavits on the part of the defendants, which were not read before the vice chancellor, do not materially vary the rights of the parties, as the material facts in the complainant’s bill are not denied. Neither is it *576sworn that the aggregate amount of the property and effects of the defendants does not exceed one hundred dollars. But as the question has been raised, it is proper that I should express an opinion upon the right of the respondents to use these affidavits on the appeal. The appeal must be decided upon the same papers and facts which were before the vice…
2Cited by26 opinions
- Murray v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Coates Bros. v. . WilkesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Turnbull v. Prentiss Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Brinkman v. RitzingerIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Grantham v. LucasWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.