Ladew v. Hudson River Boot & Shoe Manufacturing Co.
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, Ff.ew York county. Action by Edward R. Ladew and Joseph II. Ladew against the Hudson River Boot & Slice Manufacturing Company. From an order denying a motion to vacate an attachment, William M. Ketcliam, who had been appointed a temporary receiver of defendant’s property, appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtDaniels, J.
The attachment was issued on the ground that the defendant had assigned, disposed of, and secreted, and was about to assign, dispose of, and secrete, property with intent to defraud its creditors. The attachment was issued on the 23d clay of July, 1891, and the temporary receiver of its property was appointed on the 29th of the same month, in a proceeding for the voluntary dissolution of the corporation. The charge that the company had or was about to dispose of its property to defraud its creditors depended on the facts that, within a week prior to the issuing of the attachment, its…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stow v. StacyNew York Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Nolan v. Louis Workman Co.New York Supreme Court · 1932