Legal Opinion

Garfield National Bank v. Bostwick

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided June 19, 1891Published

Appeal from trial term. Action by Garfield National Bank against William L. Bostwick and another. In proceedings supplementary to an execution, an order was entered on the 13th day of March, 1891, extending the receivership of one Mynderse Van Cleef, who had theretofore been appointed by the supreme court in an action in Tompkins county, which order of extension required him to give additional security in the sum of $800. Afterwards an order was entered vacating the order by…

Read the full summary

Appeal from trial term. Action by Garfield National Bank against William L. Bostwick and another. In proceedings supplementary to an execution, an order was entered on the 13th day of March, 1891, extending the receivership of one Mynderse Van Cleef, who had theretofore been appointed by the supreme court in an action in Tompkins county, which order of extension required him to give additional security in the sum of $800. Afterwards an order was entered vacating the order by which the receivership was extended, and appointing one George J. Vestner receiver in the place of Van Cleef. Defendant…

1Opinion of the CourtMcGown, J.

A judgment was recovered on the 7th day of April, 1885, in the supreme court, Tompkins county, by the Tompkins County National Bank, plaintiff, against William L. Bostwick, the above-named defendant, for the sum of $3,815.81; and on the 17th day of April, 1885, in a special proceeding supplemental to an execution, issued on said judgment, Mynderse Van Cleef was, by an order made and entered on April 17,1885, appointed by the Honorable Marcus Lyon, justice of said court, receiver of the property of said Bostwick. In pursuance of said order, the receiver executed a bond as required by said…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Banks v. PotterNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1861

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API