Roosevelt v. Post
New York Court of Chancery
THE deeretal order in tins case made on the eleventh da~ of February one thousand eight hundred and thirty-three, the right of the complainant to participate in and receive ~t share of the warfage of a certain bulkhead or wharf in the city of New York; and directed a reference to a master in order to ascertain, by evidence, the customary mode of wharfage among the proprietors of such property and to take an account of what should be due to the complainant from the defendants…
Read the full summary
THE deeretal order in tins case made on the eleventh da~ of February one thousand eight hundred and thirty-three, the right of the complainant to participate in and receive ~t share of the warfage of a certain bulkhead or wharf in the city of New York; and directed a reference to a master in order to ascertain, by evidence, the customary mode of wharfage among the proprietors of such property and to take an account of what should be due to the complainant from the defendants or any of them for his proportion of the `wharfage which had, theretofore, been received by the 1atter~ All further…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chahcelloe.
The master has taken an account of the wharfage received from the bulkhead by[¡the several defendants for the whole period of possession prior to the filing of the complainant’s bill, that is to say, from the year one thousand eight hundred and eighteen to November one thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine; with the amounts received by the defendants respectively; and what would be the complainants proportion thereof and the sums which would be due from the defendants to make up such proportion. Upon the supposition, however, of the complainant’s not being entitled to an…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Grout v. CooperNew York Supreme Court · 1876
- Spear v. NewellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1859