# Wintringham v. Wintringham

> New York Supreme Court · October 15, 1822 · 20 Johns. 296

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5474557

## Case

- **Full name:** Wintringham against Wintringham
- **Court:** New York Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 15, 1822
- **Citations:** 20 Johns. 296
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 5 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5474557

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
The application here is in behalf of a creditor at large, not a judgment creditor. In Frazier v. Frazier, according to our recollection, the motion was in behalf of a judgment creditor. The case of Wiggins v. Armstrong, is analogous ; and the Chancellor, after examining all the cases, refused to grant the party relief, until he had completed his title at law, by judgment and execution. The power exercised by this Court, in staying executions and setting aside judgments, on the ground of fraud, is an equitable power; and if a Court of Chancery will not grant relief, except in favour of a judgment creditor, a fortiori, a Court of law cannot.
Motion denied. (b)
Vide Hendricks v. Robinson, ( 2 Johns. Ch. Rep. 283 .) Brinkerhoff v. Brown, Williams v. Brown, and M‘Dermutt v. Strong, ( 4 Johns. Ch. Rep. 671 . 682. 687.) Spader v. Davis, ( 5 Johns. Ch. Rep. 280 .) Brinkerhoff v. Marvin, (Id. 320.)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5474557. Public record. Not legal advice.