Baldwin v. Tynes
New York Supreme Court
Motion to dissolve an injunction. This was a creditor’s action brought by Harris M. Baldwin, Nathaniel Fisher, and Henry Dix, against Julian G. Tynes, Adolphus D. Smith? and Samuel S. J. Frith, to set aside an assignment for benefit of creditors made by Julian G. Tynes and, Adolphus D. Smith, composing the firm of Tynes & Smith, to the defendant, the assignee, Samuel S. J. Frith.
Read the full summary
Motion to dissolve an injunction. This was a creditor’s action brought by Harris M. Baldwin, Nathaniel Fisher, and Henry Dix, against Julian G. Tynes, Adolphus D. Smith? and Samuel S. J. Frith, to set aside an assignment for benefit of creditors made by Julian G. Tynes and, Adolphus D. Smith, composing the firm of Tynes & Smith, to the defendant, the assignee, Samuel S. J. Frith. The assignment in question described -the assignor Tynes as the resident partner of the firm at the city of New York, and the assignor Smith as of the British Province of Prince Edward’s Island. The assignee was a…
1Opinion of the CourtIngraham, J.
The principal objections to the validity of the *34assignment, and for which I conclude the injunction was granted, were—
1st. That the assignment was not acknowledged by both partners.
2d. That it was made only by one of the firm.
The assignment purports to be executed by the firm in the name of the firm, and acknowledged by one of the partners as the deejl of the firm. This I think was a sufficient acknowledgment by the party executing within the provisions of the' statute.
The party who executed, acknowledged it. If the execution is good, the acknowledgment is good also.
2. The assignment, was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Blank & Brother Candy Co. v. WalkerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Lowenstein v. FlauraudNew York Supreme Court · 1877
- Lowenstein v. FlauraudNew York Supreme Court · 1877