O'Neil v. Nagle
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of New York affirming a judgment of that court in favor of plaintiff. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoesen, J.
—Nagle is a resident of New Jersey, and is bound by its laws. Everitt & Pidcock are also residents of New Jersey. Nagle owed a debt to one Healy, who made an assignment for the benefit of creditors to O’Neil, the plaintiff. Healy owed a debt to Everitt & Pidcock. The assignment for the benefit of creditors made by Healy is valid according to the laws of the state of New York, but is void under, the laws of the state of New Jersey, because it gives a preference to a favored creditor, and preferences are not tolerated in New Jersey. Everitt & Pidcock began in New Jersey a suit for the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Williams v. . IngersollNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Warner v. . JaffrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Embree & Collins v. HannaNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Guillander v. . HowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Burlington & Missouri River Railroad v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Steingut v. National City Bank of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1941