Legal Opinion
Hitner v. Boutilier
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 15, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Appeal from special term. Action by Joseph G. Hitner against Enos Boutilier and Alexander M. Hubley. From an order denying defendants’ motion to vacate an attachment, defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
This is an appeal from an order denying defendants’ motion to vacate an attachment. The motion was made on the papers upon which the attachment was granted. In the affidavits for the attachment, the only statement of the facts constituting plaintiff’s alleged claim or cause of action was as follows:
“That the grounds for said claim and causes of action are fully set forth in the complaint in this action, which is hereto annexed, and which has been duly verified by this deponent September 20, 1892; and deponent here refers to the said complaint, and the same and the whole of it is made a part…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Steuben County Bank v. . AlbergerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Haebler v. . BernharthNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Buell v. . Van CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Jacobs v. . HoganNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Ackroyd v. AckroydNew York Supreme Court · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- First National Bank v. WallaceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- In re HuffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Short v. Desco Shoe Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969