Donnelly v. Morris

Superior Court of New York

Donnelly v. Morris

13 N.Y.S. 427, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1154

The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo·Decided January 5, 1891·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff did not establish any equity upon the motion. The supposed equity was founded upon the application by defendant to the payment of the note of partnership assets, or the defendant’s breach of his agreement to apply those assets to the payment of the note. Either contingency does not create an equity. All of it is that it is inconvenient to ascertain the facts, and to go to Massachusetts to defend the action there. This is not ground of equitable interference. Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff did not establish any equity upon the motion. The supposed equity was founded upon the application by defendant to the payment of the note of partnership assets, or the defendant’s breach of his agreement to apply those assets to the payment of the note. Either contingency does not create an equity. All of it is that it is inconvenient to ascertain the facts, and to go to Massachusetts to defend the action there. This is not ground of equitable interference. Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

Donnelly v. Morris, 13 N.Y.S. 427, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1154 (superctny 1891).

Pincite

13 N.Y.S. 427 (Donnelly v. Morris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related