Cumming v. Egerton
The Superior Court of New York City
This was a motion made by the assignee of a judgment debtor of whose estate a Beceiver had been appointed in supplementary proceedings, to compel such Beceiver to employ a different attorney and counsel from that of the judgment creditor, in the present action commenced by such Beceiver to set aside an assignment by such debtor to such assignee, as fraudulent.
1Opinion of the CourtRobertson, J.
This is an action brought by a Beceiver of the defendant, Egerton, appointed in another court on supplementary proceedings on a judgment against him, to set aside a fraudulent conveyance. It seems to be settled too long to be questioned, that a Beceiver in such case, acquires more than the interest of the judgment debtor; he takes the place of the judgment creditor; indeed becomes, in law, the assignee of both their interests, for the benefit of the latter. (Porter v. Williams, 5 Seld., 142; Gillet v. Moody, 3 Comst., 479; Talmage v. Pell, 3 Seld., 328; Curtis v. Leavitt, 15 N. Y. R., 12.)…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cassilear v. SimonsNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
- Green v. HicksNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
- Warren v. SpragueNew York Court of Chancery · 1844
3Cited by10 opinions
- Clapp v. ClappNew York Supreme Court · 1888
- Goddard v. . StilesNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Branch v. HarringtonNew York Supreme Court · 1875
- Reade v. WaterhouseThe Superior Court of New York City · 1872
- Ullman v. CameronAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.