Corson v. Ball
New York Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order made at a special term, vacating an attachment,- in an action wherein the plaintiff sought to enforce a contract of sale and purchase made for her benefit, and to recover the purchase money contracted to be paid by the defendant, against whom the attachment issued.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Geo. G. Barnard, J.
There is no question but that an attachment can be allowed, issued and served, before the service of the summons is fully ^ completed. The 227th section of the Code expressly says, “the plaintiff, at the time of issuing the summons, or at any time afterwards, may have the property of such defendant attached,” &c. The learned judge who delivered the opinion in Kerr v. Mount, (28 N. Y. Rep. 659,) in his remarks on this subject seems to have overlooked this clause.
The objection .that this is a suit in equity, and not an action at law, and. that the attachment…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kerr v. . MountNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
3Cited by6 opinions
- Studwell v. . ShapterNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Martin v. HollandIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Hendrickson v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1901
- Lazenby v. CodmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Smyth v. MayerNew York Supreme Court · 1918
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.