Bank of Monroe v. Keeler
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decision of the vice chancel-l°i' of the eighth circuit. The bill was filed against the appellants, Keeler and Durant, who resided in Albany, as judgment debtors, to obtain satisfaction of the complainants’ judgment out of their property, which could not be reached by execution.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decision of the vice chancel-l°i' of the eighth circuit. The bill was filed against the appellants, Keeler and Durant, who resided in Albany, as judgment debtors, to obtain satisfaction of the complainants’ judgment out of their property, which could not be reached by execution. The appellants having entered an appearance, gave a stipulation, in conformity to the 191st rule of the court of chancery, that an order might be entered to take the bill as confessed, and for a reference to appoint a receiver to take the defendants’ examinations upon oath. Upon this…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There is no doubt that the complainants’ solicitor acted in perfect good faith in obtaining this order, and without any intention of subjecting these defendants to unnecessary expense. But both he and the vice chancellor appear to have misapprehended the intention of the 191st rule of this court. The settled practice of this court, in these creditors’ bills, is not to compel the defendants, whose property is all placed beyond his control by the injunction, to attend a great distance from home, and on expense, for the purpose of assigning his property to the receiver and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Peck v. BaldwinNew York Supreme Court · 1890