Legal Opinion

Gallopin v. Winsor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 15, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

We consider that the government of Mexico is a necessary party in interest in the fund proposed to be impounded by this receivership order; and since it is a sovereign State and cannot be made a party without its consent, there was no jurisdiction to appoint receivers of its funds or to issue an injunction against the disposition thereof. We think the order was improvident and should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the appellants, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Finch, P. J., McAvoy, Martin, O’Malley and Sherman, JJ. Order reversed, with ten…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ezra v. LamontNew York Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Issaia v. Russo-Asiatic BankNew York Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Lamont v. Travelers InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
  4. Frazier v. Hanover BankNew York Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Lamont v. Travelers InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API