Block v. Farley

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Block v. Farley

143 Misc. 785, 257 N.Y.S. 392, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1093

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 12, 1932

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 143 Misc. 785 (Block v. Farley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Block v. Farley, 143 Misc. 785, 257 N.Y.S. 392, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1093 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

While, ordinarily, the United States courts are courts of limited jurisdiction they are given exclusive jurisdiction in bankruptcy and, therefore, their orders and judgments possess all the incidents and qualities of finality of courts of general jurisdiction in such matters. (Sabin v. Larkin-Green Logging Co., 218 Fed. 984.) In the instant case it appeared on the face of the order discharging the prisoner that it was made in bankruptcy proceedings, which was the fact. Therefore, the ministerial officer was protected in obeying the order of discharge. {Levy v. Melody, 50 Misc. 509.)

Order modified to the extent of denying the motion to dismiss the first separate defense, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untekmyer, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

While, ordinarily, the United States courts are courts of limited jurisdiction they are given exclusive jurisdiction in bankruptcy and, therefore, their orders and judgments possess all the incidents and qualities of finality of courts of general jurisdiction in such matters. (Sabin v. Larkin-Green Logging Co., 218 Fed. 984.) In the instant case it appeared on the face of the order discharging the prisoner that it was made in bankruptcy proceedings, which was the fact. Therefore, the ministerial officer was protected in obeying the order of discharge. {Levy v. Melody, 50 Misc. 509.)

Order modified to the extent of denying the motion to dismiss the first separate defense, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untekmyer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 Misc. 785, 257 N.Y.S. 392, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1093, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/block-v-farley-nyappterm-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack