Legal Opinion

Schlemmer v. Myerstein

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1860PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Motion by plaintiff for an attachment against the defendant.

1Opinion of the Court

Leonard, Justice.

Nothing is shown to have occurred or come to the knowledge of the plaintiff, or his agents, to authorize the granting of an attachment, since he applied for and obtained such a warrant in the marine court. The attachment in that court -was vacated after opposition and argument on the merits of the application, on the same state of facts now existing.

The facts have been more fully presented in this court, but they are the same which then existed, and might have been presented with the same care on the hearing of the motion in the marine court. No new case is here presented.…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Enderlin State Bank v. JenningsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
  2. First National Bank of Sundance v. Moorcroft Ranch Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1894

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

Powered by the Exa API