Pittsfield National Bank v. Bayne
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from that part of the order of the General Term •f the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made February 1Y, 1893, which, allowed respondent, David J. Lees, as receiver, to retain $450 out of moneys in his hands as such receiver. The defendants Bayne and one Campbell, constituting a .partnership, executed on the 4th of March, 1890, an assignment for the benefit of their creditors to the defendant William H. Tailer.
Read the full summary
Appeal from that part of the order of the General Term •f the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made February 1Y, 1893, which, allowed respondent, David J. Lees, as receiver, to retain $450 out of moneys in his hands as such receiver. The defendants Bayne and one Campbell, constituting a .partnership, executed on the 4th of March, 1890, an assignment for the benefit of their creditors to the defendant William H. Tailer. The plaintiff was a creditor of the partnership, and, after obtaining a judgment for its claim against the firm, commenced this action to set aside the…
1Opinion of the CourtPeckham, J.
Mr. Tailer did not pay the money voluntarily, but only by reason of the order of the Special Term of the court and under protest. The receiver was a moving party to the proceeding resulting in the granting of such order. By the terms of the judgment appointing the receiver, the defendant Tailer had the right to pay the amount of plaintiffs judgment and costs directly to it, and such right remained until ten days after the service upon Tailer of a certified copy of the judgment or decree. This certified copy was never served upon him, and hence the receiver never had the legal right to demand…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Haebler v. . MyersNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
3Cited by18 opinions
- In Re Proving the Will of StaigerNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- First National Bank of Laramie v. CookWyoming Supreme Court · 1904
- Hickey v. Parrot Silver & Copper Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1905
- Ogden City v. Bear Lake & River Water Works & Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1898
- McHarg v. Commonwealth Finance Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.