Ladd v. Stevenson

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Citation19 N.E. 842,112 N.Y. 325
Decision Date29 January 1889
PartiesLADD v. STEVENSON et al.

112 N.Y. 325
19 N.E. 842

LADD
v.
STEVENSON et al.1

Court of Appeals of New York.

January 29, 1889.


Appeal from supreme court, general term, First department.

On or about the 1st day of March, 1878, the defendant Willett agreed in writing to repay to the plaintiff, William J. Ladd, a loan of $12,500 in equal monthly installments, and in a certain contingency mentioned ‘to give said Ladd satisfactory security for the repayment of said loan by installments above mentioned, or to pay the same forth with in cash.’ The contingency upon which the security was to be given happened. The agreement contained nothing showing what kind of security was to be given, and there was no written stipulation to give security upon real estate. On the 22d day of May, 1878, the plaintiff caused the agreement to be recorded as a mortgage in the office of the register of the city and county of New York, and on the next day commenced an action in the supreme court against Willett, in his complaint alleging the execution of the agreement; that the defendant had failed to repay the entire loan, or to give satisfactory or any security for the repayment of the same; and that it was the intention and purpose of the agreement that the defendant should mortgage to the plaintiff all his right, title, and interest in certain real estate mentioned in the complaint; and demanding judgment that he specifically perform the agreement, and execute a mortgage upon the real estate mentioned for the repayment of the loan, with interest; and that he, and all persons claiming under him subsequent to the commencement of the action, be barred and foreclosed of all right, claim, lien, or equity of redemption in the premises; and that the premises be decreed to be sold according to law, and out of the proceeds of such sale the plaintiff be paid the sum of $12,500, with interest thereon, besides costs. On the same day he filed a notice of the pendency of the action, in which it was stated that the object of the action was to obtain judgment against Willett that he ‘specifically perform the said agreement, and that he execute a mortgage upon the following described real estate and property for the repayment of $12,500, with interest, by installments, as specified in said contract, and that the premises in said county to be affected herein are described as follows:’ then follows a description of 20 pieces of real estate in the city of New York. In January, 1879, Willett answered the complaint, denying any breach of the agreement, and setting up various payments on account. No...

To continue reading

Request your trial
220 practice notes
  • Kollmeyer v. Willis, No. 8544
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • September 20, 1966
    ...of 'the idea that a judgment should not be set aside arbitrarily, capriciously or without good cause . . ..' 11 Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 19 N.E. 842, 844(2); Bardach v. Mayfair-Flushing Corp., 49 Misc.2d 380, 267 N.Y.S.2d 609, 612(2); In re Board of Directors of Automatic Chain Co.,......
  • Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Slavin, 524426
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 14, 2017
    ...party may still invoke a court's inherent authority to vacate its own order or judgment in the interest of justice (see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842 [1889] ; Cippitelli v. Town of Niskayuna, 277 A.D.2d 540, 541, 715 N.Y.S.2d 110 [2000] ). Accordingly, unlike an aggrieve......
  • Batson v. State, 6 Div. 798
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • May 26, 1927
    ...grounds at common law, is not clearly evidenced in the statute. Woodward Iron Co. v. Brown, 167 Ala. 316, 52 So. 829; Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 19 N.E. 842, 8 Am.St.Rep. 748; 29 Cyc. 722, 727, 759. That is to say, courts of record have inherent power independent of the statute to set......
  • Cassini v. Barnosky (In re Cassini), 2018–00747
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 13, 2020
    ...of substantial justice" ( Galasso, Langione & Botter, LLP v. Liotti, 81 A.D.3d 884, 885, 917 N.Y.S.2d 667 ; see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842 ; Katz v. Marra, 74 A.D.3d 888, 890, 905 N.Y.S.2d 204 ), "[a] court's inherent power to exercise control 120 N.Y.S.3d 136 over it......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
221 cases
  • Kollmeyer v. Willis, No. 8544
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • September 20, 1966
    ...of 'the idea that a judgment should not be set aside arbitrarily, capriciously or without good cause . . ..' 11 Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 19 N.E. 842, 844(2); Bardach v. Mayfair-Flushing Corp., 49 Misc.2d 380, 267 N.Y.S.2d 609, 612(2); In re Board of Directors of Automatic Chain Co.,......
  • Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Slavin, 524426
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 14, 2017
    ...party may still invoke a court's inherent authority to vacate its own order or judgment in the interest of justice (see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842 [1889] ; Cippitelli v. Town of Niskayuna, 277 A.D.2d 540, 541, 715 N.Y.S.2d 110 [2000] ). Accordingly, unlike an aggrieve......
  • Batson v. State, 6 Div. 798
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • May 26, 1927
    ...grounds at common law, is not clearly evidenced in the statute. Woodward Iron Co. v. Brown, 167 Ala. 316, 52 So. 829; Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 19 N.E. 842, 8 Am.St.Rep. 748; 29 Cyc. 722, 727, 759. That is to say, courts of record have inherent power independent of the statute to set......
  • Cassini v. Barnosky (In re Cassini), 2018–00747
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 13, 2020
    ...substantial justice" ( Galasso, Langione & Botter, LLP v. Liotti, 81 A.D.3d 884, 885, 917 N.Y.S.2d 667 ; see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842 ; Katz v. Marra, 74 A.D.3d 888, 890, 905 N.Y.S.2d 204 ), "[a] court's inherent power to exercise control 120 N.Y.S.3d ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT