Hitchcock v. St. John
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in Ihis cause was filed by a judgment creditor after execution returned unsatisfied, for the purpose, first, of having an assignment of partnership property set aside, and next, of declaring a certain bill of sale of household furniture fraudulent and void, and that the amount of the judgment might be paid out of the funds.
1Opinion of the Court
The Assistant Vice-Chancellor :
I shall first examine the question respecting the assignment of the partnership property. The defendants Isaac R St. John and David W. St. John were partners carrying on business in the city of New-York, 'and also in Augusta, Georgia, under the firm of I. R St. John & Co. The former resided in New-York; the latter in Augusta. In the month of June, 1838, a suit was commenced against them by the present complainants, and judgment was recovered in the month of July of that year, which was followed up by the present bill, filed the 26th of November, 1838. On the 5th…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Egberts v. WoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Havens & Dorr v. HusseyNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- Butler v. StoddardNew York Court of Chancery · 1838
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bohler, Huse & Co. v. TappanDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1880
- Wetter v. SchlieperNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1858
- Loeschigk v. HatfieldThe Superior Court of New York City · 1867