Summary

Portrait of Levi Woodbury Levi Woodbury Davis v. Tileston — Opinion of the Court

The former judgment having been in the District Court of the United States, these grounds for an injunction against the further enforcement of it till the mistake as to the defence is corrected, and the balance allowed to be satisfied in notes of the bank then held, or an equivalent to their value at the time of the judgment, seem equitable on these allegations, thus admitted.
The respondents can, ex aequo et bono, claim to stand in no better condition than the bank. If there was a further good defence against the bank, there was against them.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Levi Woodbury Levi Woodbury Davis v. Tileston — Opinion of the Court

Not that the demurrer does not in law admit the goodness of a further defence, and one not known at the judgment, and likewise the existence of fraud by those parties, but that the statement of the defence is not entitled to full credit, is contradictory, and develops culpable neglect to enforce the defence, and that the fraud is not set out with sufficient detail.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature