History
  • No items yet
midpage
Jarmon v. Wiswall
24 N.J. Eq. 68
New York Court of Chancery
1873
Check Treatment
The Chancellor.

It is insisted that it has been the practice of the court to-grant such orders as that under consideration, on ex parte application, without notice. If such has been the practice, I am not willing to follow it so far as the amendment of decrees after enrollment is concerned. The application, in this case, was, in fact, for a material amendment of the final decree after enrollment. Such amendment may be made, on the ground that it is an amendment in a matter as to which there could not have been a doubt of the complainant’s right to have it made part of the decree, if it had been asked for when- the decree was entered, and the omission to insert it in *70the decree, as part thereof, arose from inadvertence. Dorsheimer v. Rorback, ante p. 33 ; Sprague v. Jones, 9 Paige 395. But it must be made bn petition and notice.

The order will be vacated.

Case Details

Case Name: Jarmon v. Wiswall
Court Name: New York Court of Chancery
Date Published: May 15, 1873
Citation: 24 N.J. Eq. 68
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.