Lottimer v. Lord
New York Court of Common Pleas
These cases came before the court upon an order to show cause, obtained by the plaintiffs in the second suit. The matters in controversy, as presented upon the hearing, are distinctly stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
These cases came before the court upon an order to show cause, obtained by the plaintiffs in the second suit. The matters in controversy, as presented upon the hearing, are distinctly stated in the opinion. The plaintiffs in the first suit composed four mercantile firms, namely, Lottimer, Large & Co., Auffmordt, Hessenberg & Co., A. Iselin & Co., and August Wetter, and they, with then* associates, held claims against the limited partnership of “ Lord & Brown,” amounting to about $30,000. The plaintiffs in the second suit constituted the house of Sehulten & Hurd, and also represented demands…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodruff, J.
It appears by the affidavits and papers before me on the motion in the above causes, that the plaintiffs in the suit first above named, Messrs. Lottimer and others, as creditors, commenced their suit on or about the 18th day of December last, against Lord & Brown, the general partners and Marks, the alleged special partner, in the firm of Lord *186& Brown, praying for an injunction and'receiver; and on or about the same day, gave notice of a motion for the appointment of such receiver.
That a friendly negotiation thereupon ensued, having for its object a compromise between the firm of Lord & Brown…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Howell v. RipleyNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Osborn v. Heyer & BurdettNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- In re Eagle Iron WorksNew York Court of Chancery · 1840