Onderdonk v. Voorhis
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. • The plaintiff, by his complaint, seeks to recover of the defendants the sum of $>813.76, for the amount of work, labor, and materials furnished to and in repairing the schooner Signal, at the instance and request of the defendant, Jacob Voorhis, jun. who was the owner of said vessel, and alleges that' proceedings were taken to enforce payment of said sum as a lien on said vessel, in which proceedings a bond was…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. • The plaintiff, by his complaint, seeks to recover of the defendants the sum of $>813.76, for the amount of work, labor, and materials furnished to and in repairing the schooner Signal, at the instance and request of the defendant, Jacob Voorhis, jun. who was the owner of said vessel, and alleges that' proceedings were taken to enforce payment of said sum as a lien on said vessel, in which proceedings a bond was given by the defendants, and the vessel discharged, the defendants, John Pettigrew and William Voorhis, being co-obligees…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Robertson, J.
The main, if not the only question in this action, is whether the plaintiff’s claim was a subsisting lien on the vessel attached, on the 13th of December, 1862, the day the warrant of attachment was issued. The condition of the bond sued upon is to pay all claims, established to be due, to the plaintiff, and “ to have been subsisting liens” upon such vessel, pursuant to the provisions of the statute of April, 1862, relative to demands against ships and vessels at the time of exhibiting the same. This follows the requisitions of that statute, as to form. (N. Y. Sess.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ring v. GibbsNew York Supreme Court · 1841
- Franklin v. PendletonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1850
- Pendleton v. . FranklinNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
- Coleman v. BeanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1861