Haggerty v. Granger
New York Supreme Court
On the 8th November, 1854, judgments were recovered by the plaintiffs against Granger, Comfort and Van Cott, executions issued thereon, and returned unsatisfied. In December following, this action was commenced to set aside assignments made. In September of that year, Yan Cott’s individual property was amply sufficient to pay all his individual debts, and he would have been solvent, if his firm had been so.
Read the full summary
On the 8th November, 1854, judgments were recovered by the plaintiffs against Granger, Comfort and Van Cott, executions issued thereon, and returned unsatisfied. In December following, this action was commenced to set aside assignments made. In September of that year, Yan Cott’s individual property was amply sufficient to pay all his individual debts, and he would have been solvent, if his firm had been so. His firm wished to make an assignment giving preferences, which he would not consent to; and on the 18th day of that month, he alone made an assignment, disposing of all his individual…
1Opinion of the Court
Mitchell, Justice.
In Havens agt. Hussey, (5 Paige,) it was decided that one partner could not, against the will of another, make an assignment of the partnership property to a trustee, for the benefit of creditors, giving preferences. In Deming agt. Colt, and in Hayes agt. Heyer, (3 Sandf. Superior Ct. Reports,) it was held that such assignment could not be made, even if no preferences were given. These cases were referred to and approved in Everson agt. Gehrman, &c., (10 How. Pr. R. 301,) at the general term of the supreme court, in this district. That, however, was not the point then…
2Cited by2 opinions
- In re LawrenceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1881
- Steinhart v. FyhrieMontana Supreme Court · 1885