¶1said he could scarcely conceive of a case in which an appeal from an order of the chanceilor refusing a re-hearing ought to be sustained. Such application is addressed purely to the discretion of the chancellor, and *173strong indeed must be the circumstances in such a case, to induce this court to sustain an appeal. Besides, it is very questionable whether an order refusing instructions to a master as to the discharge of his duties can be the subject of an appeal. The party is not remediless ; on the coming in of the report, if the master has omitted what he ought to have done, or on the contrary, has done what he ought not to have done, the party has a right to except to his report, and then the conduct of the master is properly inquirable into. For these reasons he was of opinon, that the appeal should be dismissed.
4 Wend. 170
Williamson v. Hyer
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
Decided December 15, 1829
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · decided 1829-12-15
Motion to dismiss appeal. On the 18th September, 1827, Thomas R. Hyer exhibited his bill in the court of chaneery against the respondent and others, praying an account of the rents, issues and profits, and of the proceeds of. the sales of certain real estate late of Gerrit Hyer, of the city of New-York, deceased.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1829-12-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1904
6 state decisions
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 →