Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

87 Tenn. 1

Andrews v. Warner

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 12, 1888

Tennessee Supreme Court · decided 1888-09-12

<p>X. Appeal. Discretionary. Not premature, when.</p> <p>An appeal is not prematurely granted — when allowed by the Chancellor, in the exercise of his discretion under §3874 (M. & V.) Code, before report by the Master — from a decree, upon a bill to enforce a mechanic’s lien, adjudging that complainant is entitled to recover the contract price for erecting a building “less the value of work necessary to its completion,” and ordering an account “to ascertain the exact amount due complainant on this basis.”</p> <p>Code construed: § 3874 (M. & V.); § 3157 (T. & S.).</p> <p>2. Same. Same. Exercise of discretion presumed. ■</p> <p>Where an appeal lies in the Chancellor’s discretion, the mere grant of the appeal, without more, is a sufficient exercise of his discretion. (See x Heis., 752.)</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1952

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1888-09-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Caldwell, J.

¶1This bill was filed for the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien.

¶2The Chancellor heard the cause upon the pleadings and proof, and thereupon adjudged the complainants entitled to recover the amount for which they had agreed to erect the building, less the value of work necessary to its completion. To ascertain the exact amount due .complainants upon this basis the cause was, in the same decree, referred to the Master for an account and report.

¶3At the same term, and before the coming in of the Master’s report, the complainants appealed from the decree mentioned.

¶4The defendants now insist that the appeal is premature, because taken before report by the Master and action thereon by the Chancellor, and upon *3this ground they move this Court to dismiss the appeal.

¶5The motion is not well made.

¶6The appeal is authorized by section 3874 of the Code (M. & V.), which is in the following language :

“The Chancellor or Circuit Judge may, in his discretion, allow an appeal from his decree in equity causes, determining the principles involved, and ordering an account, or a sale, or partition, before, the account is taken, or the sale or partition is made,” etc.

¶7Manifestly the decree here appealed from determines the “ principles involved ” in the litigation, and the granting of the appeal by the Chancellor was an exercise of “his discretion” to allow it.

¶8The motion is overruled.

/87/tenn/1 · .json · Public domain