In Chittenden v. Brewster (1864) 69 U.S. 191, the appellants asserted that an award entered in their favor was too small. The Supreme Court refused to investigate and rule upon errors assigned by one who had not appealed, but noticed them to the extent of granting leave to reopen the questions in the court below on a retrial which was ordered on the appeal of the other party. The Supreme Court said: "A party not appealing from a decree cannot take advantage of an error committed against himself; as for example, that the appellant had omitted to prove certain formal facts averred in his bill, and which were prerequisite of his case. But where - assuming the fact averred, but not proved to be true - a decree given against a party in the face of such want of proof is reversed in his favor, it may be reversed with liberty given to the other side to require him to prove that same fact which the appellee, when seeking here to maintain the decree, was not allowed to object that the appellant had failed, below, to prove."