Legal Opinion

Hand v. Ortschreib Building Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 1929PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCropsey, J.

It being found that the bank after the service of the supplementary order paid out moneys it then had on deposit, it committed a contempt, as it violated the injunction contained in the order, and it must be fined the amount so paid out. The question of law is presented whether the bank is further guilty of contempt in paying out moneys that it received from or for the debtors after the order was served. While there is a difference in the language of section 785 of the Civil Practice Act, dealing with the examination of a third party in supplementary proceedings, and section 797, providing…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walker v. CramAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  2. In re Trustees of the Board of Publication & Sabbath School WorkNew York Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Rainsford v. TempleNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  4. Kroner v. ReillyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
  5. Gibney v. ReillyNew York Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Burrows v. JorgensenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  2. Tolk v. Corn Exchange Bank Trust Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API