Ontario Bank v. Walker
This text of 1 Hill & Den. 652 (Ontario Bank v. Walker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
If Roberts be a surety, he may perhaps, on showing a proper case, be substituted by chancery in the place of the bank, and allowed to-take the remedy he now asks at our hands. In law, however, the judgment is extinguished by the,payment; and he can only have a suit to recover over against the prior parties. The very reason why chancery performs the office of subrogation, in favor of a surety who has paid, is, because, the debt being extinguished, a court of law cannot do it.
Motion denied.
The dictum of Mercy, J. in The New York State Bank v. Fletcher, (5 Wendell, 85, 89,) must therefore, it seems, be understood in reference mainly to the powers of chancery.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Hill & Den. 652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ontario-bank-v-walker-nysupct-1841.