Whitney v. Johnson
New York Supreme Court
ErRoe from the municipal court of Brooklyn. Jeromus I. Johnson, in behalf of himself and partner, J. R. Johnson, on the 4th February, 1833, made application to the municipal court of the village of Brooklyn, for an attachment against the goods and chattels of F. H. Whitney.
Read the full summary
ErRoe from the municipal court of Brooklyn. Jeromus I. Johnson, in behalf of himself and partner, J. R. Johnson, on the 4th February, 1833, made application to the municipal court of the village of Brooklyn, for an attachment against the goods and chattels of F. H. Whitney. He presented his affidavit, that Whitney was indebted to his firm in the sum of $52, over and above all discounts, for goods sold and delivered by his firm to Whitney; that he believed that Whitney was about to remove his property from the county of Kings, with intent to defraud his creditors, and that he had assigned and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The question raised by the record in this case is, whether the municipal court of the village of Brooklyn have jurisdiction to proceed by attachment under the statute of 1831, entitled “an act to abolish imprisonment for debt and to punish fraudulent debtors.’' Laws of 1831, page 404, § 34, 35.
*361The municipal court was created by the act of April 3d, 1827, entitled “ an act to reduce the law incorporating the village of Brooklyn and the several acts amendatory thereof into one act, and to amend the same.” By the 47th section, the _ , . , - . % . , ,, .. . . justices…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Mitchell v. HalseyNew York Supreme Court · 1836