Clarke v. Dunham
4 Denio 262
Opinion
We do not think the proceedings irregular. The committee should apply to the court of chancery. (Robertson v. Lain, 19 Wend. 649.)
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Clarke v. Dunham, 4 Denio 262 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1847).
4 Denio 262 (Clarke v. Dunham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Moore v. Flagg
137 A.D. 338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
Grant v. Humbert
114 A.D. 462 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)
Speck v. Pullman Palace Car Co.
12 N.E. 213 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1887)
Hanley v. Brennan
19 Abb. N. Cas. 186 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1887)
Heard v. Sack
81 Mo. 610 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1884)
Denni v. Elliott
60 Tex. 337 (Texas Supreme Court, 1883)
Coombs v. Janvier
31 N.J.L. 240 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1865)
Niblo v. Harrison
9 Bosw. 668 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1863)
Ex parte Northington
37 Ala. 496 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1861)
Demilt v. Leonard
11 Abb. Pr. 252 (New York Supreme Court, 1860)
Hall v. Taylor
8 How. Pr. 428 (New York Supreme Court, 1853)
Walker v. Clay
21 Ala. 797 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1852)
King v. Robinson
33 Me. 114 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1851)
Soverhill v. Dickson
5 How. Pr. 109 (New York Supreme Court, 1850)