¶1The defendant, Francis W. Speck, must apply to the chancellor to dismiss the appeal, so far as it is taken from that part of the decree which directs a sale of the premises No. 38 McDougall street; for, as to that portion as well as other parts appealed from, I am apprehensive the appeal operates as a stay by virtue of the 86 § section of the statute relating to appeals. At the same time, I certainly think it ought not to have the effect of delaying Mr. Speck in the recovery of his mortgage debt; but still I see no other course for him to take, except that of ap*621plying to the chancellor to dismiss the appeal so far as it stands in the way of a sale for his benefit.
4 Edw. Ch. 619
Westervelt v. Haff
Decided January 6, 1845
New York Court of Chancery · decided 1845-01-06
Bill of foreclosure. A mortgage for $1000 had been made to the complainant by the defendants John P. Haff and wife on certain undivided real estate and a part of which estate was known as No. 38 McDougall street, New York. A prior mortgage had been executed by the same parties on the last mentioned property to Francis W. Speck, who was made a defendant and had put in an answer and who was recognized as a prior incumbrancer as to No. 38 McDougall street.
Decided 1845-01-06