Averill v. Loucks
New York Supreme Court
This was a motion, made in behalf of the Agricultural Bank, and of the assignees of the defendant Loucks and of his copartner, Morgan Gray, for an order directing the sheriff of the county of Montgomery to pay over the surplus moneys in his hands, arising on the sale of real estate of the defendant under the execution issued in the above cause, to the Agricultural Bank, on a mortgage of said bank, given by the defendant, on one of the lots sold by the sheriff.
Read the full summary
This was a motion, made in behalf of the Agricultural Bank, and of the assignees of the defendant Loucks and of his copartner, Morgan Gray, for an order directing the sheriff of the county of Montgomery to pay over the surplus moneys in his hands, arising on the sale of real estate of the defendant under the execution issued in the above cause, to the Agricultural Bank, on a mortgage of said bank, given by the defendant, on one of the lots sold by the sheriff. The judgment in the above suit was docketéd on the 11th of July, 1846. The sheriff advertised for sale under the execution issued on…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Paige, P. J.
The motion in this case is made for the benefit of the partnership creditors of Loucks <fc Gray, who are preferred in the assignment of Loucks & Gray next after the Agricultural Bank. The debt of the Agricultural Bank is a partnership debt of the firm of Loucks & Gray, and is first preferred in the assignment. It is objected by the counsel of William I. Bellinger that the assignment of George P. Loucks is void because he substantially secures to himself the right to give future preferences. The assignment of Loucks & Gray is obnoxious to a like objection. Their…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wakeman v. GroverNew York Court of Chancery · 1832
- Robertson v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1821
- Wilder v. KeelerNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Purdy v. DoyleNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Barnum v. HempsteadNew York Court of Chancery · 1839
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- National Butchers & Drovers' Bank v. HubbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Brown v. Crookston Agricultural Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- National Bank v. CushingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1881
- Sutherland v. . BradnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Louden v. BallIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.