Dunham v. . Waterman
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Superior Court of the city of New- a York. The plaintiffs brought their action, as judgment creditors of Waterman, to have set aside, as fraudulent and void, a judgment confessed August 25th, 1851, by Waterman to the defendants, J. & G-. Hecker, and an assignment to them, executed the same day, of all Waterman’s property, which, by its terms, was declared to be collateral to and in aid of the said judgment and of a levy which had been made, under an execution…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of the city of New- a York. The plaintiffs brought their action, as judgment creditors of Waterman, to have set aside, as fraudulent and void, a judgment confessed August 25th, 1851, by Waterman to the defendants, J. & G-. Hecker, and an assignment to them, executed the same day, of all Waterman’s property, which, by its terms, was declared to be collateral to and in aid of the said judgment and of a levy which had been made, under an execution issued thereon, upon Waterman’s personal property; and also to set aside and avoid all proceedings had under the…
1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.
The plaintiffs, as subsequent judgment creditors of the defendant, Henry Waterman, seek to set aside the judgment confessed, and the assignment made by Waterman to the defendants John and George Hecker, on the 25th. of August, 1851, as fraudulent and void. The objectio n to the judgment is, that it was confessed without a compliance with the second subdivision of section three hundred and eighty-three of the Code. Previous to the judgment of this court in the case of Chappel v. Chappel (2 Kern., 215), the true interpretation of the subdivision in question was involved in much obscurity and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lawless v. HackettNew York Supreme Court · 1819
3Cited by68 opinions
- Young v. . HeermansNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Vandegrift v. . Cowles Engineering Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Smith v. . BeattieNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Freligh v. . BrinkNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- DeWolf v. A. & W. Sprague Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1881
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.