Legal Opinion
Universal Bag Co. v. Fensley
New York Supreme Court
Decided November 15, 1896PublishedCited by 1 opinion
Creditor’s bill. The opinion states the facts.
1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.
When the validity of an assignment is unchallenged by creditors, not they, but the assignee, may maintain an action to reclaim property transferred by the assignor in fraud of the assignment. Swift v. Hart, 35 Hun, 128; Spring v. Short, 90 N. Y. 538, 544. Here the plaintiff impeaches the assignment; and impeaches it on the ground that, in connection with a previous transfer by the assignor, it was a device to defraud creditors.. If such be the fact it is open to attack by creditors, and as against them is of no avail. Rothschild v. Salomon, 5 N. Y. Supp. 865, 868; Chambers v. Smith, 14 id.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Becker v. . KochNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Seitz v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Mygatt v. . CoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- White v. . BenjaminNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Trustees of Canandarqua Academy v. McKechnieNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Universal Paper-Bag Co. v. FensleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897