Scudder v. Van Amburgh
New York Court of Chancery
Judgment creditor’s bill; and where a supplemental bill had been filed to reach furniture that had belonged to the judgment debtor, and sold'by him to the defendant, Isaac Van Amburgh, pendente lite. No receiver had been appointed. The question was, on the effect of the filing the bill as a notice. The defendant, Van Amburgh, interposed a demurrer.
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor :
I am inclined to think that the lis pendens operated as a constructive notice to the defendant, Van Amburgh, when he claims to have purchased and paid for the furniture, and that he cannot hold it against the judgment creditor of Tysen, his vendor, who had, at the time, acquired at least an equitable lien upon it from the moment of filing his bill in this court. But, without expressing a definite opinion on this point, which, perhaps, is not a decided one: Murray v. Lilburn, 2 J. C. R. 444, I am of opinion that if the defendant, Van Amburgh, would claim to be a bona fide…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Holbrook v. . New Jersey Zinc Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Claflin v. GordonNew York Supreme Court · 1886