Cooney v. Cooney
New York Supreme Court
THE plaintiff has recovered a judgment.against the defendant, upon which proceedings supplementary to execution have been taken, and a receiver appointed. The defendant’s household furniture was insured, in the sum of §200, in the Lycoming Insurance Company, and a loss has happened, said furniture having been destroyed by fire.
Read the full summary
THE plaintiff has recovered a judgment.against the defendant, upon which proceedings supplementary to execution have been taken, and a receiver appointed. The defendant’s household furniture was insured, in the sum of §200, in the Lycoming Insurance Company, and a loss has happened, said furniture having been destroyed by fire. The plaintiff and said receiver move for an order directing the defendant to execute an assignment, to the receiver, of the policy of insurance, and all claims arising thereunder. The defendant is a householder, having a family for which he provides.
1Opinion of the CourtHardin, J.
Before the enactment of the Code, it was held that the appointment of a receiver vested in him all the debtor’s personal property, without any assignment. (Mann v. Pentz, 2 Sandf. Ch. 257. Wilson v. Allen, 6 Barb. 542.) Since the Code, it has been settled that such appointment has the like effect upon the real property as well as personal estate of the debtor. (Porter v. Williams, 5 Seld. 148.) From the operation of this rule is excepted such property of the judgihent debtor as is by statute exempt from levy and sale on execution. (Hudson v. Plets, 11 Paige, 180. Andrews v. Rowan, 28 How.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hudson v. PletsNew York Court of Chancery · 1844
- Wilson v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1849
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chase v. SwayneTexas Supreme Court · 1895
- Cameron v. FayTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Cullen v. HarrisMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Ellis v. Pratt CitySupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Continental Insurance v. DalySupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.