Legal Opinion
McCarthy v. Farley
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 5, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.
1. The sheriff made a proper levy pursuant to the Friede attachment. Failure to enter the levy in the sheriff’s book did not destroy the validity of the lien. It obtained priority because its delivery to the sheriff antedated the delivery of plaintiff’s execution. (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 680, 960.) It became complete when service was effected on the bank. It may not be successfully attacked because the depository did not return a certificate to the sheriff. (Prahl Construction Corp. v. Jeffs, 126 Misc. 802, 804; Korytkowsky v. Greniewicki, 220 App. Div. 237, 239.) 2. The doctrine of dormancy…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mechanics' & Traders' Bank of Jersey City v. DakinNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Prentiss v. GreeneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
- Castriotis v. . Guaranty Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Lynch v. . CraryNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Korytkowski v. GreniewickiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lankenau v. Coggeshall & HicksCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- Metro Burak, Inc. v. Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1975
- John C. Lankenau, Esq., as Receiver of Lester D. Brown, D/B/A L. D. Brown Co. v. Coggeshall & Hicks, Applicant-Appellee. This Case Came Up on Appeal Under the Style SEC v. Brown, That Used in the District Court. Upon Request, However, the Case on Appeal Has Been Renamed, as Indicated. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lester D. Brown, D/B/A L. D. Brown Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965