Bortman v. Urban Motion Picture Industries, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
The docketing of appellants’ judgment gave them a lien upon the real estate of the above-named defendant, and it may be said that one object of this suit was to prevent the enforcement of that lien by execution. At all events, this suit seeing to have been used for that purpose.
Probably the court below, in entering the ordinary order appointing receivers in cases like this, did not have the lien rights of Berger and Joy called to its attention; but by the motion to vacate such rights were acutely brought before it. We are of opinion that the use of this injunction to prevent, or seek to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kline v. Burke Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Simon v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Marshall v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- National Surety Co. v. State BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Southern Bank & Trust Co. v. FolsomCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ke-Sun Oil Co. v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932