From Transcribe Wiki
Revision as of 12:39, 30 June 2021 by Amoulis (talk | contribs) (Protected ".MjkwNzY.MTAyNDQ3" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

4 -risdiction, and are the only tribunal, who can exercise the power, and grant the relief so often sought, and now again insisted on here. Can there be dread or apprehension, that he cannot get justice there? or is he speculating upon this Court for time? 10. The complainant need have no fears of getting the money, if the Court of Appeals affirms the decree of this Court, he repeats to this third reitterated charge, that the supercedeas bond is good, in form and substance, but whether or not, this honorable Court is not the tribunal to determine the question, and it is supposing a great deal to assert, "that it is not only the duty, but ought to be the pleasure of a Court of equity, to reach forth its arm and prevent the irremediable mischief &c" this defendant supposes, yea knows, that this Court will no willingly usurp the power of the appellate Court, and will no take pleasure in doing a wrong, and entertaining a man, who comes once, twice, yea three times, with unclean hands, seeking that which this Court cannot give, against good morals, and the laws of the land, there is no danger of his suffering as complained. 11. This defendant denies the power of this Court under the authority referred to in 5th Leigh to interpose in this matter, 1st Because it has no jurisdiction over the case in the Court of Appeals. 2nd because that case affords no new doctrine to the Court. 3rd because there is no analogy between that case and this. In that case, there were mutual bonds for sums certain, not questioned or doubted, In this case there is a judgment on the one hand, not severed, appealed from or controverted, on the other hand, a decree upon a commissioner's report, presenting those alternate statements, showing balances each way, from this decree there is a supercedeas, in the nature of a new trial, to be had and determined by an appellate Court, and bond with unquestionably good security given, on supercedeas. Further if the cases were analogous, then this defendant insists that he occupies the ground of Campbell the transferree or assignee of Dillard, in said case, & like him should prevail. Neither that nor any other case to be found in the books, will authorise an unliquidated, undefined & controverted amount, to be set off against a judgment. 13. This defendant has already anticipated the answer to this allegation of the bill. He does own said judgment by transfer he did receive under