Legal Opinion

McBride v. Langan

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 14, 1890PublishedCited by 1 opinion

At chambers. Action by Harry McBride and Charles F. Droste, partners, doing business as produce commission merchants, under the firm name of McBride & Co., against Patrick T. Langan, George E. de le Bee, and Joseph P. Langan, partners under the firm name of P. T. Langan & Co., for the price of goods sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendants.

Read the full summary

At chambers. Action by Harry McBride and Charles F. Droste, partners, doing business as produce commission merchants, under the firm name of McBride & Co., against Patrick T. Langan, George E. de le Bee, and Joseph P. Langan, partners under the firm name of P. T. Langan & Co., for the price of goods sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendants. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants fraudulently contracted the debt for the goods purdhased by them, and filed an affidavit specifying the alleged fraudulent acts, and alleging “that in the month of May, 1887, the defendants formed their…

1Opinion of the CourtBarrett, J.

This case differs from those where no averments of fraud were made in the complaint. The court there was without jurisdiction to grant the order of arrest. Here, however, averments of fraud are made, though imperfectly. The statement that the defendants were guilty of fraud in contracting the debt may not be issuable, but the statement that they have disposed of their property with intent to defraud their creditors is. It would, of course, be insufficient, standing alone and without proofs, to warrant an order of arrest. With proper proofs, however, dehors the complaint, it was sufficient to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Valentine v. RichardtNew York Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Flatow v. Von BremsenCity of New York Municipal Court · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API