Greenleaf v. Mumford
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment. The plaintiffs in this action previously brought an action against Peter R. Mumford, one of the present defendants, in which they obtained an attachment. The sheriff attempted to levy this attachment upon money upon deposit in the Nassau Bank, in New York city, supposed to belong to Mumford.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment. The plaintiffs in this action previously brought an action against Peter R. Mumford, one of the present defendants, in which they obtained an attachment. The sheriff attempted to levy this attachment upon money upon deposit in the Nassau Bank, in New York city, supposed to belong to Mumford. But it proved that the money in question had been deposited in the name of one Oakey, who had also drawn checks against the deposit, payable to his own order, and had got them certified by the bank, and left them, unindorsed, in a box kept by him at the bank. Both Oakey and the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.*—Sutherland, J.
The exceptions to the conclusions of law, that the service of the warrant of attachment on the Nassau Bank constituted a levy on the fund in question; that the money deposited by Oakey in *132the Nassau Bank was bound by the levy made under the attachment; and that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment, were all well taken. These conclusions of law were all plainly erroneous, for the reason that they all assume that the sum of $53,000 deposited by Oakey in the Nassau Bank, for which the bank had given him credit, and for which the bank had certified checks drawn by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lawrence v. . Bank of the RepublicNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Mechanics & Traders' Bank of Jersey City v. DakinNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- Kelly v. LaneNew York Supreme Court · 1864
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lanning v. StreeterNew York Supreme Court · 1869