Teal v. Woodworth
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal by the defendant, E. Woodworth, from the decree of the vice chancellor of the eighth circuit, founded upon the complainant’s bill only. S. Woodworth, the father of the defendant, died in 1823, seised of 100 acres of land in the county of Cayuga, leaving the defendant and five other children his heirs at law, one of whom was an idiot.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal by the defendant, E. Woodworth, from the decree of the vice chancellor of the eighth circuit, founded upon the complainant’s bill only. S. Woodworth, the father of the defendant, died in 1823, seised of 100 acres of land in the county of Cayuga, leaving the defendant and five other children his heirs at law, one of whom was an idiot. A few months after the death of the father, all the children except the idiot agreed upon a disposition and division of the lot, by which Abner, one of the sons, was to have about 50 acres of the east part of the lot, and was to pay to two of…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
No regular appeal having been entered from the order overruling the demurrer, within the time allowed by law for appealing from an interlocutory order, that decision of the vice chancellor cannot be reversed on this appeal from the final decree. That order must therefore remain in full force; and the complainant is entitled to his costs of the argument of the demurrer, whatever may be the final result of the appeal as to the merits of the cause. But if there is no equity in the complainant’s bill, nor any thing which could entitle him to any kind of relief, this decree cannot…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Garner v. PrewittSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Gillespie v. BaileyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877
- Gass v. HawkinsTennessee Supreme Court · 1860