American Hosiery Co. v. Riley
New York City Court
I. April, 1882. Appeal to general term. This action was brought by the plaintiff, a corporation, against the defendant, for making, while acting as sheriff of the county of Kings, a false return to an execution issued by plaintiff on a certain money judgment recovered by plaintiff against William Hartung and one Schutt, copartners together, for the sum of $427.86. The judgment in question was docketed in Kings county on April 13, 1880, and execution in the usual form was…
Read the full summary
I. April, 1882. Appeal to general term. This action was brought by the plaintiff, a corporation, against the defendant, for making, while acting as sheriff of the county of Kings, a false return to an execution issued by plaintiff on a certain money judgment recovered by plaintiff against William Hartung and one Schutt, copartners together, for the sum of $427.86. The judgment in question was docketed in Kings county on April 13, 1880, and execution in the usual form was issued to the defendant sheriff on the same day, commanding him to satisfy the judgment. The sheriff returned “no property…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, J.
This case turns upon the effect to be given to the various orders made in the action of Wynkoop v. Hartung & Schutt. On December 13, 1879, judgment was entered in the last named action against both defendants, upon consent of an attorney appearing in the name of both, and execution was issued upon the same. Subsequently, defendant Hartung moved, upon an order to show cause, to set' aside the judgment as against himself. This motion was granted, and on January 21,1880, an order was entered *334upon that decision, setting aside the judgment and execution as to both defendants.
On February 2, another…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- King v. . GalvinNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Pennie v. . Continental Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1876