Peer v. Bloxham
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On rule to show cause why proceeds of sale under execution should not be paid to plaintiff in part satisfaction of his judgment.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Parker, J.
The meritorious question involved in this application relates to the respective priorities of execution creditors as against a fund of money in courc, realized by sale under one or more of the executions. But, as a matter of practice, we cannot examine into or decide this question for the reason that no evidence appeal's to have been taken under the rule to show cause from which the rights of the respective execution creditors to the fund, or their priorities, can be determined. The plaintiff, claiming the prior right to the fund, relies…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Klein v. Adams Express Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1898
3Cited by4 opinions
- Blair v. VetranoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1934
- Paterson Stove Repair Co. v. RitzerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1939
- Federici v. ChristiansenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
- In re DujanskiHudson County Circuit Court, N.J. · 1935