Thompson v. Dimond

3 Edw. Ch. 298, 1839 N.Y. LEXIS 373, 1839 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 26
New York Court of Chancery·Decided March 26, 1839·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In this case (of foreclosure) a motion was made for a resale. There were peculiar circumstances, but the purchaser had [299]*299declined to take the title, and had requested the master to transfer his bid to the complainant, who agreed to take his place. The master, as a matter of course, accepted the latter as the purchaser ; and executed a conveyance to him. One of the points raised by the defendants was, that this course was not correct; and The Vice-Chancellor considered the proper course to be, where the last bidder refused to take, and is not compelled to perfect his purchase, for the master to sell the property over again, and not allow the complainant to take the property at the former bid.

Mr. Peter De Witt, for the complainant.

Mr. Warner and Mr. Burrill, for the defendants.

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

Thompson v. Dimond, 3 Edw. Ch. 298, 1839 N.Y. LEXIS 373, 1839 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 26 (N.Y. 1839).

3 Edw. Ch. 298 (Thompson v. Dimond) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ely v. Matthews
128 A.D. 513 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
Augustine v. Doud
1 Ill. App. 588 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1878)