Central National Bank v. Ft. Ann Woolen Co.
New York Supreme Court
Action by the Central National Bank of Troy against the Ft, Ann Woolen Company and John M. Barnett, commenced by attachment. The Glens Falls National Bank, a subsequent attaching creditor, moves to vacate and set aside plaintiff’s attachment,
1Opinion of the CourtFubsman, J.
This motion is made solely upon the papers on which the plaintiff’s attachment was originally granted, and various objections are urged to the sufficiency of such papers. The first is that the affidavit of Mr. Warren, president of the plaintiff, does not state the indebtedness of defendants to the bank to be over and above all counterclaims known to the plaintiff, as required by section 636, Code Civil Proc. ■ The affidavit of Mr. Warren sets *642forth that “he is the president of the plaintiff;” that a cause of action exists in favor of the plaintiff against the defendants, describing it; and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Steuben County Bank v. . AlbergerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Manufacturers' National Bank v. HallNew York Supreme Court · 1891
- Essex County National Bank v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1891
- Hodgman v. BarkerNew York Supreme Court · 1891
- E. W. Bliss Co. v. Opera-Glass Supply Co.New York Supreme Court · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Central National Bank of Troy v. Fort Ann Woolen Co.New York Supreme Court · 1894
- Hellwig v. SeeleyNew York Supreme Court · 1919