Hennessy v. Sheldon, 12 Wall. 440 (1871). · Go Syfert
Search
Hennessy v. Sheldon, 12 Wall. 440 (1871). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
24 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: NDF1, LLC v. Verwayne (nyed, 2025-09-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1902 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1902 1964 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) NDF1, LLC v. Verwayne
E.D.N.Y · 2025 · confidence medium
A foreclosure action is not akin to a proceeding at law to collect a money judgment; it is a proceeding in equity, see Walker v. Dreville, 79 U.S. 440, 441 (1870), and in that way, is more similar to an appeal from an injunction.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hennessy
v.
Sheldon
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 27, 1871.
12 Wall. 440
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

79 U.S. 440

20 L.Ed. 446

12 Wall. 440

HENNESSY
v.
SHELDON.

December Term, 1870

1

ERROR to the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

2

Sheldon, a citizen of New York, sued Hennessy, a citizen of Texas, on two notes. The defendant pleaded the general issue and payment. Judgment was given for the plaintiff, and the defendant took this writ of error and gave bond to cause the writ to operate as a supersedeas. There was no bill of exceptions.

3

Messrs. Albert Pike and R. W. Johnson, for the defendants in error, asserting that the writ of error was manifestly frivolous, vexatious, and for delay, asked affirmance and damages at the rate of ten per centum under the 23d Rule of court.[*]

4

No opposing counsel.

5

The CHIEF JUSTICE.

6

There is nothing in the record which tends to show error in this judgment, or to repel the conclusion that the writ is prosecuted merely for delay. The judgment must, therefore, be

7

AFFIRMED WITH TEN PER CENT. DAMAGES.

*

See this rule, supra, 166.