Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
William DeyErmand, Executor, etc., Appellant, v. Henry Chamberlin, Impleaded, etc., Respondent, 1882 — 88 N.Y. 658 · caselaw · US
Property · MBE-tested
William DeyErmand, Executor, etc., Appellant, v. Henry Chamberlin, Impleaded, etc., Respondent
88 N.Y. 658·New York Court of Appeals·1882·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
William DeyErmand, Executor, etc., Appellant, v. Henry Chamberlin, Impleaded, etc., Respondent.
(Argued March 13, 1882;
decided March 21, 1882.)
This was an action to foreclose a mortgage.
Defendant Chamberlain, who purchased the premises subsequent to the execntion of the mortgage, was sought to be held liable for a deficiency because of a clause in his deed assuming and agreeing to pay the mortgage. It appeared that • said clause was inserted without the knowledge and contrary to the intention of the parties to the deed, and was not at any time accepted or assented to by Chamberlain, and he only became aware of its existence after the commencement of the suit. ' Held, that Chamberlain was not liable, the court citing Kilmer v. Smith (77 NT. Y. 226); Albany City S’v’gs Instfn v. Burdick (87 id. 40).
I. F. Williams for appellant.
Stephen G. Glarrke for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.
A subsequent motion was made for a reargument, which was denied April 18, 1882.
Danfobth, J., writing opinion.