Rothstein v. Autourist A/S

The defendant, a Danish corporation, appearing specially, moves to vacate a warrant of attachment on the grounds that (1) the statement in the plaintiff’s affidavit in support of the warrant that he is entitled to recover the sum demanded over and above all counterclaims known to him is false and (2) the property levied upon was not the defendant’s, but had previously been assigned by it to a bank for value. The defendant also moves to set aside the service of the summons and complaint pursuant to an order for service by publication based on the warrant of attachment.

The plaintiff is the…