Cochran v. Webb

Decided October 18, 1851

The Superior Court of New York City · decided 1851-10-18

In an ejectment, the defendant cannot, in an answer denying the plaintiff’s legal title, set np an equitable defence looting to affirmative relief. » Where a defendant in an ejectment, after putting in issue the plaintiff’s title, files a cross complaint setting up an equitable right to the land, and praying for a release and other relief, the court will not stay the first suit till the trial of the latter, but will permit the legal title to be first tried, and if the plaintiff in the first suit succeed, will then stay his proceedings until the equitable issue can be determined. (Before Oakley, Ch. J., and Mason, Campbell, and Paine, J. J.)

Decided 1851-10-18

¶1By the Court.

Oakley, Ch. J.

¶2It was argued that a defendant in ejectment, cannot, .in an answer denying the plaintiff’s legal title, set up an equitable defence looking to affirmative relief. We have on consideration determined that this argument is sound, and for this reason among others, that under the code the equitable issue requires a different mode of trial from that arising on the allegations in the complaint. Issues which under the old system were called legal are triable by jury; those that were denominated equitable are to be tried by the court.

¶3As to the application for a stay of proceedings, we think the legal title should be first tried, and if the claimant establish a legal title, we can stay the entry of judgment or the subsequent proceedings, until the equitable cross claim can be determined. We have not considered the question whether the facts set up in the cross complaint do or do not furnish a ground for relief.

¶4Order accordingly.