Knickerbacker vs. Brintnall

Knickerbacker vs. Brintnall. No affidavit of merits is necessary, under the 9lst rule, on an appeal from a decree of a vice chancellor in a mortgage case, where such decree was in favor of the defendant. This was an appeal from the decision of a vice chancellor, in a mortgage case, which decision was in favor of the defendant. And the cause was on the calendar for argument, in the fourth class. No affidavit of merits having been filed by the defendant, J. D. Willard, for the complainant, moved that the cause be taken up out of its order; claiming that it was entitled to a preference, under the 91st rule. [MAJORITY — The Chancellor] The Chancellor decided that the 91st rule only applied to appeal cases, when the decision appealed from was against the defendant, and not to cases where the decision was in his favor ; that in cases of the latter kind there was no presumption that the appeal was brought for delay. Motion denied.