Bitting v. Vandenburgh
The Superior Court of New York City
Before Bosworth, Gh. J., Slosson, Woodruff and Mou-CRIEF, Justices. Proceedings were taken, in this action supplementary to execution, before one of the justices of this court, in which the defendants were examined touching their property, after the return of an execution unsatisfied, pursuant to the provisions of section 292 of the Code.
Read the full summary
Before Bosworth, Gh. J., Slosson, Woodruff and Mou-CRIEF, Justices. Proceedings were taken, in this action supplementary to execution, before one of the justices of this court, in which the defendants were examined touching their property, after the return of an execution unsatisfied, pursuant to the provisions of section 292 of the Code. Upon that examination, it appeared that among other articles of personal property, each of three of the defendants was in possession of a watch. A receiver was appointed, and an order was made by Mr. Justice Hoffman, on the 27th day of November, 1858, that…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court —Woodruff, Justice.
The question discussed upon this .appeal was, whether under the statute of 1842, (Sees. Laws of 1842, chap. 157, § 1,) the defendants’ watches are exempt from execution ? For if so, they aré not liable to be reached by supplementary proceedings, and the order directing their delivery to the receiver was erroneous.
The three defendants by whom respectively the watches are held, have it is alleged, each a family for whom he provides, and he claims to retain his watch upon the ground that upon the facts shown on the motion at special term, the watch within a fair…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wheeler v. CropseyNew York Supreme Court · 1850
3Cited by2 opinions
- Richards v. HubbardSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Holstein v. RiceNew York Supreme Court · 1862