Hugh v. Higgs
| Decision Date | 14 March 1823 |
| Parties | HUGH, Plaintiff in Error , v. HIGGS and Wife, Defendants in Error |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This is an action on the case, brought to recover the money which the plaintiff in error had been decreed by a Court of Chancery to pay to the defendants in error. The defendant in the Court below contended, that an action at common law did not lie on a decree in Chancery, and excepted to the opinion of that Court, overruling this objection. It is admitted by the opposite counsel, that, in general, the action does not lie to recover money claimed under the decree of a Court of equity, but he supposed that, in this case, the money had been received by the defendant below, upon transactions which took place after the decree. Upon examining the record, we perceive that the money was in his hands, as trustee, at the time the order to pay it over was made.
An objection was also made to an opinion of the Circuit Court, upon another part of the case. There was an agreement between the parties, under seal, and having some relation to the money to which part of the claim relates, and the defendant below objected to the form of the action on that account. But we cannot discover, from the bill of exceptions, whether the money in contest was, or was not, received under that instrument. On that point, therefore, the Court gives no opinion. The judgment is to be reversed for error in the opinion of the Court below, which declares the action to be sustainable on the decretal order of the Court of Chancery, and the cause is remanded to the Circuit Court for further proceedings.
Judgment reversed.
a He cited Carpenter v. Thornton, 3 Barnw. & Ald. 52.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
German v. German
...... . . Upon. ancient equitable principles an action brought upon a decree. in equity might be brought in a court of equity. In Hugh. v. Higgs, 21 U.S.(8 Wheat.) 697, 5 L.Ed. 719, in an. opinion by Marshall, C.J., it was held that an action on the. case would not lie to recover ......
-
German v. German
...principles an action brought upon a decree in equity might be brought in a court of equity. In Hugh v. Higgs, 21 U.S.(8 Wheat.) 697, 5 L.Ed. 719, in an opinion by Marshall, C. J., it was held that an action on the case would not lie to recover money due under a decree in chancery. In a note......
-
Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Newton
...jurisdiction, enforce it, and so an action was unnecessary. The chief justice, in Van Buskirk v. Mulock, relied upon the case of Hugh v. Higgs, 8 Wheat. 697, as establishing the law in the federal courts against an action at law on a decree. Whatever force this case may have had once is now......
-
Boyle v. Schindel
...debt and made them effective by judgment and execution. The leading cases cited and relied on by both appellant and appellee are Hugh v. Higgs, 8 Wheat. 697; Pennington v. Gibson, 16 How. 65, and v. Jones, 3 G. & J. 186. The case of Hugh v. Higgs was decided by that eminent jurist, Chief Ju......