Crowder v. Hopkins
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the seventh circuit, dismissing the bill in this cause. The original bill was filed in July 1822, by James Hole, the patentee of Jot No. 85 in Brutus, in the Military Bounty Tract, against W. Torrey and wife ; and also against twenty-four other defendants, most of whom then were, or theretofore had been, in possession of different portions of the lot, claiming the legal title to their respective portions under…
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the seventh circuit, dismissing the bill in this cause. The original bill was filed in July 1822, by James Hole, the patentee of Jot No. 85 in Brutus, in the Military Bounty Tract, against W. Torrey and wife ; and also against twenty-four other defendants, most of whom then were, or theretofore had been, in possession of different portions of the lot, claiming the legal title to their respective portions under conveyances from Torrey. The subpoena was served upon Torrey and wife soon after the filing of the bill, and they put in their…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The question whether the deed from Hole to Torrey, of the 27th of June, 1797, is genuine does not properly arise in this case, as there is no charge in the complainant’s bill that the deed is a forgery. The only charge which, if proved, would entitle the complainant to equitable relief is that Torrey agreed to act as his agent, to recover the land from settlers who were holding it adversely, and that under pretence of getting Hole to execute a power of attorney to recover the land, he had obtained from him a conveyance of the premises. For if the decision of the case is to turn…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bradstreet v. ClarkeNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Jackson ex dem. Burhans v. BlanshanNew York Supreme Court · 1808
- Jackson ex dem. Ramson v. ShepardNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Jackson, ex dem. Cornelius v. M'KeeNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by1 opinion
- Holbrook v. OrglerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1875