People ex rel. Hasbrouck v. Ulster Common Pleas
New York Supreme Court
Motion for a mandamus. James J. Hasbrouck applied to the Ulster common pleas for an order directing the sheriff of Ulster to pay over to him the surplus of the .proceeds of a sale of real property under executions against James O. Hasbrouck, on the ground that he was entitled to the same as a judgment creditor of James O. Hasbrouck.
Read the full summary
Motion for a mandamus. James J. Hasbrouck applied to the Ulster common pleas for an order directing the sheriff of Ulster to pay over to him the surplus of the .proceeds of a sale of real property under executions against James O. Hasbrouck, on the ground that he was entitled to the same as a judgment creditor of James O. Hasbrouck. The motion was resisted by John Lounsberry, who alleged that he also was a judgment creditor of James O. Hasbrouck, and entitled to the surplus, and that the judgment in favor of James J. Hasbrouck was fraudulent. The common pleas made an order awarding a feigned…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Cowen, J.
[630] Lounsberry held a lien, and had a full right in virtue of that till Van Burén took his deed in June, 1836. 11 is direct and primary course, it is true, was to redeem : but the land going as it probably «lid for its full value, and he being obliged to pay the full purchase money to the *331sheriff, the surplus would go to the debtor, who might thus apply it to satisfy this alleged fraudulent judgment of the relator, or convert it to his own use. That would be but an indifferent remedy for Lounsberry. The only difference between this case and that of Van Nest v. Yeomans,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Every v. EdgertonNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Van Nest v. YeomansNew York Supreme Court · 1828
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re AndersonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1866