Paton v. Wright
The Superior Court of New York City
Motion for an injunction and receiver. Mr. Mathews made the following points: First. The motion invokes the discretion of the court, and seeks to enjoin three actions previously commenced, involving the questions sought to be put in issue in this action. This is unnecessary, and this court has decided it will not sanction or permit the practice. (Grant agt. Quick, 5 Sand.
Read the full summary
Motion for an injunction and receiver. Mr. Mathews made the following points: First. The motion invokes the discretion of the court, and seeks to enjoin three actions previously commenced, involving the questions sought to be put in issue in this action. This is unnecessary, and this court has decided it will not sanction or permit the practice. (Grant agt. Quick, 5 Sand. R. 612 ; Code, § 150, as amended 1852, as to equitable defences.) I. The suit against the “ Home Insurance Company,” was commenced by Peterson & Humphrey, in this court, June 19th, 1854. The suit against the “ Albany Mutual…
1Opinion of the Court
Hoffman, Justice.
On the 4th of December, 1853, a policy of insurance was effected with the Southern Mutual Insurance Company, in the name of the firm of Wright, Lanier & Co.; another policy was effected on behalf of the same firm, on the 24th of December, 1853, with the Columbia Insurance Company, for the sum of $2,500 ; and on the same day another with the Commercial Insurance Company, for $2,500. It is sufficient to notice as to these policies of insurance, that they were placed by the firm in the hands of the late C. Ellis, by an assignment dated the 14th of January, 1854, to collect the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pardee v. Haynes & MerriamNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Austin v. FigueiraNew York Court of Chancery · 1838
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rosenberg v. BoehmNew York Supreme Court · 1893