Legal Opinion · Dissent

Simpson v. . Jersey City Contracting Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 11, 1900Published

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 11,1900, reversing an order of Special Term vacating a levy of attachment made upon certain certificates representing shares of stock of the Hew Jersey and Pennsylvania Telephone Company. The question certified and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.

Read the full summary

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 11,1900, reversing an order of Special Term vacating a levy of attachment made upon certain certificates representing shares of stock of the Hew Jersey and Pennsylvania Telephone Company. The question certified and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. Stock of a foreign corporation is not property within the state, subject to levy of attachment against a non-resident owner. (Plimpton v. Bigelow, 93 N. Y. 592; Christmas v. Biddle, 13 Penn.…

1DissentLandon, J.

The defendant is a corporation organized and doing business in the state of New Jersey, and having no place of business in this state. The summons was personally served upon it and it has appeared in the action. It deposited and pledged with the Produce Exchange Trust Company, a domestic corporation, certificates of 3,220 shares of stock in the New Jersey and Pennsylvania Telephone Company, a corporation organized and doing business in New Jersey, as collateral security for the payment of a loan by that company to it. The sheriff made the alleged levy under subdivision 3 of section 649 of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re the Appraisal for Taxation of the Property of BronsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  2. Plimpton v. . BigelowNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  3. Warner v. Fourth National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. Winslow v. FletcherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1886
  5. Armour Bros. Banking Co. v. St. Louis National BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892

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

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

Powered by the Exa API