Killmer v. Hobart
New York Supreme Court
This was a motion to vacate an attachment granted against the defendants in a suit brought, against them as receivers appointed by the court of chancery of New Jersey, for the recovery of excessive freight alleged to have been charged by them as such receivers, for the transportation of milk to the city of New York.
1Opinion of the CourtDonohue, J.
The attachment should be vacated as asked. It is not trying the ease on affidavits. The plaintiff fixed the character in which the defendants are sued and it is not open to question a judgment here would be against them as receivers and no lien on property in the hands of another jurisdiction. The attachment is of property as receivers and would take the very property now being administered by another court.
The persons sued are the custodians of the law of another state, and are simply the officers of another court and sued as such, and to reach what they hold in that way.
Motion granted, with…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co v. Keokuk Northern Line Packet Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1883
- Clark v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1895
- Small v. SmithSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901
- Woodhull v. Farmers' Trust Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1902
- Gordon v. Spray Beach Hotel, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933