Amoré v. La Mothe
The Superior Court of New York City
Motion to set aside supplementary proceedings and a settlement made thereon. The action was brought by Lambert Amoré against Bernard J. La Mo the, and judgment was recovered in 1866, upon which execution was immediately issued, and no other execution was afterwards issued, nor was leave to issue one granted. The plaintiff died about two years after the judgment was obtained, and no letters upon his estate were ever granted.
Read the full summary
Motion to set aside supplementary proceedings and a settlement made thereon. The action was brought by Lambert Amoré against Bernard J. La Mo the, and judgment was recovered in 1866, upon which execution was immediately issued, and no other execution was afterwards issued, nor was leave to issue one granted. The plaintiff died about two years after the judgment was obtained, and no letters upon his estate were ever granted. In June, 1878, the attorney of record for plaintiff obtained upon his affidavit, the usual order for examination of defendant as a judgment debtor in supplementary…
1Opinion of the CourtVaw Vorst, J.
The objections on the part of the defendant to the proceedings taken under the judgment, which led to the settlement of which complaint is made, are substantial and valid.
The judgment was recovered in 1866, and an execu *148tion was at once issued thereon, and returned unsatisfied.
After the recovery of the judgment, and more than ten years ago, the plaintiff died.
The attorney who recovered the judgment made the affidavit upon which the order for the defendant’s examination in proceedings supplementary to execution was obtained from one of the judges of this court.
In the affidavit he swears “ that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wegman v. . ChildsNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Bellinger v. FordNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Putnam v. Van BurenNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Austin v. MonroeNew York Supreme Court · 1871
- Seeley v. BlackNew York Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lapaugh v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1887