Bondy v. Collier

City of New York Municipal Court

Bondy v. Collier

11 Misc. 443, 32 N.Y.S. 221, 65 N.Y. St. Rep. 419

CourtCity of New York Municipal Court

DecidedFebruary 15, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 Misc. 443 (Bondy v. Collier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bondy v. Collier, 11 Misc. 443, 32 N.Y.S. 221, 65 N.Y. St. Rep. 419 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Ehrlich, Ch. J.

Tlie court- below directed, that the motion to vacate the-order of arrest- be granted unless the plaintiffs executed and filed a new undertaking as provided by the Code.

The proper undertaking having been filed, and the court having power to allow the defects in the original undertaking to be amended (Code, §; 730 ; Bellinger v. Gardner, 2 Abb. Pr. 441; Irwin v. Judd, 20 Hun, 562; Beach v. Southworth, 6 Barb. 173 ; Kissam v. Marshall, 10 Abb. Pr. 424; Marvin v. Marvin, 11 Abb. [N. S.] 97), the case on appeal stands practically as if the original undertaking- had been perfect in the first instance.

The affidavit on which the order of arrest was granted sets forth a-: good cause of action for goods sold, to the defendants on the- faith of representations which afterwards proved-to be untrue. The affidavit sufficiently establishes the. fraud and. the sources of' knowledge and information clearly appear therein.

It- follows that-the order appealed from must: be affirmed, with costs.

Fitzsimons and Newburger, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs.

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