Legal Opinion

Talcott v. Thomas

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1893PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by James Talcott against Peter Thomas and John Thomas to set aside an assignment.' From an interlocutory judgment on the findings and decision of the court, and from a final judgment entered on the report of a referee appointed by the interlocutory judgment to take an accounting, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Read the full summary

Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by James Talcott against Peter Thomas and John Thomas to set aside an assignment.' From an interlocutory judgment on the findings and decision of the court, and from a final judgment entered on the report of a referee appointed by the interlocutory judgment to take an accounting, defendants appeal. Affirmed. Sanford E. North, Esq., to whom the cause was referred by the interlocutory judgment, filed the following opinion on December 12, 1891: “On the 16th day of March, 1885, the defendant Peter Thomas made a general assignment for the benefit…

1Opinion of the CourtDwight, P. J.

The action was in the nature of a creditors’ bill to set aside a voluntary assignment made by the defendant Peter to the defendant John Thomas, as being in fraud of creditors, and to obtain payment of the plaintiff’s judgment out of the assets of the assignor which had come into the hands of the assignee. All the facts necessary to entitle the plaintiff to maintain such an action were established by the pleadings, and the facts upon which, the trial court based its conclusions adverse to the validity of the assignment were established by uncontradicted evidence. Those facts were, in brief,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Coleman v. . BurrNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. Edmeston v. LydeNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
  3. Brooks v. . SchwerinNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  4. Blaechinska v. Howard Mission & Home for Little WanderersNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  5. Eager v. PriceNew York Court of Chancery · 1831

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Conger v. CoreyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  2. Detroit Automatic Scare Co. v. TorgesonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API