Van Bergen v. Demarest

New York Court of Chancery

Van Bergen v. Demarest

4 Johns. Ch. 37, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 168, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 18

CourtNew York Court of Chancery

DecidedApril 13, 1819

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 4 Johns. Ch. 37 (Van Bergen v. Demarest) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Van Bergen v. Demarest, 4 Johns. Ch. 37, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 168, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 18 (N.Y. 1819).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor,

considered that the answer of the defendant Demarest, denied all the equity of the bill, but that it would be proper and expedient, and for the interest of all parties, and especially as the rights of an infant plaintiff were concerned, that the sale in this case, under the power contained in the mortgage, should be subject to some restrictions. The counsel for the defendants consenting thereto, it was thereupon ordered, that it be referred to a Master to compute the amount due on the mortgage, and that upon the coming in of the report, the sale under the power be made under the direction of a Master, to be associated with the mortgagee for that purpose, and that a further six weeks notice of such sale be given ; and that no more of the premises be sold than the Master shall deem sufficient, provided part of the premises can be sold separately, consistently with the interest of all parties concerned; and that the injunction be deemed to be modified conformably to this order.

Order accordingly.

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

The Chancellor,

considered that the answer of the defendant Demarest, denied all the equity of the bill, but that it would be proper and expedient, and for the interest of all parties, and especially as the rights of an infant plaintiff were concerned, that the sale in this case, under the power contained in the mortgage, should be subject to some restrictions. The counsel for the defendants consenting thereto, it was thereupon ordered, that it be referred to a Master to compute the amount due on the mortgage, and that upon the coming in of the report, the sale under the power be made under the direction of a Master, to be associated with the mortgagee for that purpose, and that a further six weeks notice of such sale be given ; and that no more of the premises be sold than the Master shall deem sufficient, provided part of the premises can be sold separately, consistently with the interest of all parties concerned; and that the injunction be deemed to be modified conformably to this order.

Order accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Johns. Ch. 37, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 168, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-bergen-v-demarest-nychanct-1819.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack