In re the Claim of Flandrow
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order made by the surrogate of the county of New York, denying William H. Flandrow’s petition for the payment of his alleged claim against the estate of Tunis Van Brunt, deceased. The claim of the petitioner is based upon a judgment recov- • ered by the Marine Bank of Chicago against the said deceased for $6,858.12, on the 1st day of March, 1867, and of which judgment petitioner claims to be the owner.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order made by the surrogate of the county of New York, denying William H. Flandrow’s petition for the payment of his alleged claim against the estate of Tunis Van Brunt, deceased. The claim of the petitioner is based upon a judgment recov- • ered by the Marine Bank of Chicago against the said deceased for $6,858.12, on the 1st day of March, 1867, and of which judgment petitioner claims to be the owner. The facts upon which the plaintiff claims title to such judgment are as follows: On the 20th day of January, 1869, Henry B. Hammond commenced an action in this - court against…
1Opinion of the Court
Barrett, J.:
The single question presented by this appeal is whether the judgment recovered by the Chicago Bank against Van Brunt was legally attached in the suit of Hoffman against that bank. W e are of opinion that it was not, for the reason that a certified copy of *38the attachment was never left with the debtor, nor even with an “individual holding” the property as required by section 235 of the Old Code. It was not left with the debtor, for Van Brunt was dead when the attachment was issued, and it was not served upon any representative of his estate.
As to the other branch of the section, it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Clarke v. . GoodridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Clark v. WarrenNew York Supreme Court · 1872