Ladenburg v. Commercial Bank of Newfoundland
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by George H. Davidson, a junior attaching creditor, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York' Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 13th day of February, 1896, denying his motion, to vacate an attachment obtained by the plaintiffs in the action.
1Opinion of the Court
Van Brunt, P. J.:
In order that the moving party can succeed on a motion of this ■description, it is necessary for him to show that he has a valid levy • upon the property upon which the attachment sought to be set aside .has been levied.
In the case at bar it appears that the attachment of the moving party was issued on the 17th of December, 1895, and that the .affidavit upon which the appellant moved to set aside the respond-.ants’ attachment was made on the 5th of February, 1896. More than thirty days had elapsed between the granting of the appellant’s attachment and the making of the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Hamerschlag v. Cathoscope Electrical Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Sill Stove Works v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Hamerschlag v. Cathoscope Electrical Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Cremins v. East Lake Woolen Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Hellwig v. SeeleyNew York Supreme Court · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.