Walsh v. . Kelly
New York Court of Appeals
This is an action of replevin, brought by the plaintiff to recover the possession of a quantity of goods and merchandise, seized and taken by the defendant from plaintiff, in the city of New York. The plaintiff makes title to a portion of the goods as purchaser from the firm of Money, Manley & Co., and the defendant seized the goods by virtue of certain attachments, delivered to him to execute, against Money, Manley & Co., in favor of certain creditors of that firm.
Read the full summary
This is an action of replevin, brought by the plaintiff to recover the possession of a quantity of goods and merchandise, seized and taken by the defendant from plaintiff, in the city of New York. The plaintiff makes title to a portion of the goods as purchaser from the firm of Money, Manley & Co., and the defendant seized the goods by virtue of certain attachments, delivered to him to execute, against Money, Manley & Co., in favor of certain creditors of that firm. The question litigated in the case was, whether the sale to the plaintiff’ was fraudulent, as against the creditors of Money,…
1Opinion of the CourtMason, J.
It is conceded by the appellant’s counsel, that the most of the propositions in the judges charge are correct, and I take it to be well settled, therefore, that the defendant’s exception to the charge is too general to be of any avail to the defendant on this appeal. The exception was “ to the charge made by the comd, and each a/nd every part thereofP This is quite too general. It was held in the case of Hart v. The Rensselaer and Saratoga Railroad Company (4 Seld. R., 37), that if the charge of the court contain two propositions, and there is a general exception to the charge, a new trial…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Beaver v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Tousey v. . RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Requa v. . the City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. McCartneyIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Ayrault v. . the Pacific BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.