Hamerschlag v. Cathoscope Electrical Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, Edwin. ITamerschlag, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 8th day of February, 1897, vacating his attachment upon the motion of the Allen Advertising Agency, a subsequent lienor.
1Opinion of the Court
Rumsey, J.:
The plaintiffs attachment was issued on the 17th of November, 1896, and the property of the defendant was levied upon at that *186' time. The Allen Advertising Agency alleges that on the 27th day of November, 1896, it recovered a judgment against the defendant in this action on which an execution was issued on that day to the-sheriff of the county of New York, and the sheriff then levied under it upon the same property upon which he had previously levied the attachment. By virtue of the lien which it thus acquired, as it says, the Allen Advertising Agency moved to vacate the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Steuben County Bank v. . AlbergerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Turner v. . RobyNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Ladenburg v. Commercial Bank of NewfoundlandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sill Stove Works v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Grob v. Metropolitan Collecting AgencyNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Schnitzer v. FoxCity of New York Municipal Court · 1900