Blackington v. Goldsmith

1 How. Pr. (n.s.) 77
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1886
StatusPublished

This text of 1 How. Pr. (n.s.) 77 (Blackington v. Goldsmith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blackington v. Goldsmith, 1 How. Pr. (n.s.) 77 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1886).

Opinion

Van Brunt, J.

The fact that in the assignment no provision is made for the preference for the wages'or salaries • owing to employees may invalidate the assignment, but merely because the assignment is void upon its face affords no reason for the issuance of an attachment (Milliken agt. Dart, 26 Hun, 24). The fact that the assignee does not actually reside in the ■ state does not of itself furnish proof of fraudulent intent The preference of the notes mentioned in the moving papers does not render the assignment void upon its face. A liability may exist because of those notes, and until it is shown that no* liability does in fact exist, no fraud can be assumed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 How. Pr. (n.s.) 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blackington-v-goldsmith-nysupct-1886.