Bowe v. United States Reflector Co.
New York Supreme Court
In May, 1881, Hall, Micoll dc Cranberry commenced an action in the supreme court against the United States Reflector Company, at the same time obtaining an attachment under which the plaintiff, then sheriff of the city and county of New York, attached a large stock of gas fixtures, machinery, The reflector company demurred to the complaint upon the grounds that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, that there was a misjoinder of…
Read the full summary
In May, 1881, Hall, Micoll dc Cranberry commenced an action in the supreme court against the United States Reflector Company, at the same time obtaining an attachment under which the plaintiff, then sheriff of the city and county of New York, attached a large stock of gas fixtures, machinery, The reflector company demurred to the complaint upon the grounds that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, that there was a misjoinder of .parties and a misjoinder of causes of action. Defendant Oorbit, the reflector company’s assignee, also demurred upon the…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Vorst, J.
— There must be judgment for the plaintiff on the demurrer. Section 709 of the Code of Civil Procedure recognizes the sheriff’s right to his costs and fees, notwithstanding the attachment has been set aside ; and until paid, he is not obliged to deliver the property to the defendant. This amounts to a lien in his favor upon the goods attached for the amount' of his fees. The action is therefore proper to enforce his lien by a sale of property, for otherwise the expense of detaining it, together with his fees, would exceed the value of the property.
Justice Potter has had the subject lately…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Perrin v. McMannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892