1 Johns. Ch. 184 | New York Court of Chancery | 1814
There is no equity appearing on the face of this bill. The assignment of the judgment against Lyon and Dewey, to Tallmadge and others, and the release of the judgment against Richmond, are not charged as fraudulent acts, or done with a fraudulent intention. The very state of the case repels any possible presumption of fraud. Richmond gave notice to the plaintiffs of the proposition made to him, and required of them the deposite of the sum, for which he stood charged, so as the more effectually to indemnify him; that was not done. He then required additional security: that was not given ; and he told the plaintiffs that he should make the assignment, if this effectual indemnity was not given. There was no concealment or fraud in the case; but due notice was given of his intention. Nor was it an unreasonable or oppressive demand on the part of Richmond. He stood charged with the escape, by the judgment of the supreme court; and Lyon and Dewey stood
The bill, therefore, does not contain any gravamen, or equity. There is nothing that the defendants need to answer. The bill must be dismissed with costs.
Gold, for the plaintiff, then moved for leave to amend the bill.
Riggs, contra.
The motion for leave to amend the bill, is not founded upon any specified omission or imperfec
Motion denied, with costs.