Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Johns. Ch. 272

Van Bergen v. Van Bergen

New York Court of Chancery

Decided December 5, 1816

New York Court of Chancery · decided 1816-12-05

[ * 273 ] THE bill stated, that the plaintiff was seised, in common with the defendant, of 6£ acres of land, with two falls mill-seats thereon, and a grist-mill also, on Coxsackie creek. That on the 8th of December, 1808, he agreed with the defendant for a partition, which was made, and the west half of the land, with the upper fall and mill-seat, were set off to the plaintiff, and the residue, with one fall and mill-seat, and the mill, set off to the defendant.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1816-12-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1938

3 state decisions

201816182018301840185018601870188018901900191019201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Chancellor.

¶1I have no doubt of the jurisdiction cases private can them to be abated, as well as restrain them from being erected. (Coulson v. White, 3 Atk. 21. East India Co. v. Vincent, 2 Atk. 83.) But this is not to be done until the opposite party has been heard. Lord Hardwicke said, in the case of Ryder v. Bentham, (1 Vesey, 543.) that the Court never makes an order, on motion, to pull down any thing, though it will, sometimes, on motion,' order a thing going on to be stayed.

¶2Motion denied.

/2/johnsch/272 · .json · Public domain