History
  • No items yet
midpage
New-York Dry Dock Co. v. American Life Insurance & Trust Co.
11 Paige Ch. 384
New York Court of Chancery
1844
Check Treatment
The Chancellor

decided, that where the complainant had a perfect defence at law, to a suit instituted against him there, he was not entitled to the special interference of this court, by injunction, to restrain the proceeding there, previous to a decree in the suit instituted in this court. He said the mere neglect of the defendants here to object to the jurisdiction of the court, did not entitle the complainant fo a preliminary injunction to .restrain the proceeding at law; and thus to make it the duty of this court *385to assume the exclusive jurisdiction of the subject matter of the suit; but that when a final decree should have been made here, the court, by injunction, might restrain any proceedings at law which were inconsistent with the rights of the parties as established by such decree, and that a clause to that effect might be inserted in the final decree.

Motion for injunction denied.

Case Details

Case Name: New-York Dry Dock Co. v. American Life Insurance & Trust Co.
Court Name: New York Court of Chancery
Date Published: Dec 5, 1844
Citation: 11 Paige Ch. 384
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.