Hammond v. Hudson River Iron & Machine Co.
New York Supreme Court
DEMURRER to the complaint. The complaint set up the recovery of a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs against the Hudson River Iron and Machine Company, a corporation duly organized, the issuing of an execution thereon to the proper county, and its return hy the sheriff unsatisfied. That the amount of the judgment remained due, and that the plaintiffs were the owners thereof.
Read the full summary
DEMURRER to the complaint. The complaint set up the recovery of a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs against the Hudson River Iron and Machine Company, a corporation duly organized, the issuing of an execution thereon to the proper county, and its return hy the sheriff unsatisfied. That the amount of the judgment remained due, and that the plaintiffs were the owners thereof. That the company had property, equitable rights and choses in action, which ought to be applied on the judgment, and that the company was insolvent. That the defendants, Mears and Beach, claimed property and effects…
1Opinion of the CourtBockes, J.
This action is brought in aid of the suit at law, to reach property and effects in the hands of the defendants Hears and Beach, who it is alleged have fraudulently received the same from the judgment debtors, and unjustly assert a claim thereto against the plaintiffs’ judgment and execution. The proceeding is one formerly recognized and much favored in the court of chancery. Its object was to assist an honest creditor, and to defeat the purposes of those fraudulently combining to avoid the due execution of the law. The remedy, when a creditor’s bill was proper before the code, is still…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hadden v. SpaderCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1822
- Wakeman v. GroverNew York Court of Chancery · 1832
- Edmeston v. LydeNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Boyd & Suydam v. Hoyt & ParselNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Corning & Norton v. WhiteNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Whalen v. StrongAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- Day v. BuckinghamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Bennett v. McGuireNew York Supreme Court · 1871
- Cook v. LakeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- Jackson v. HolbrookSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.