Buchanan v. Hunt

New York Supreme Court

Buchanan v. Hunt

40 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 329

DecidedSeptember 15, 1884

StatusPublished

This text of 40 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 329 (Buchanan v. Hunt) 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

Buchanan v. Hunt, 40 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 329 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

Pratt, J.:

The court below acquired jurisdiction of the person of the judgment debtor, and he is fully amenable to its process. The remedies to which parties are entitled, and the operation of which they must abide, depend upon the law of the forum. To what extent their ■operation shall be restrained or limited by exemption laws must also depend upon the le^e fori. A non-resident coming into this State' may claim the protection of our laws equally with our own citizens. But while within our borders he may not claim to be outside the laws by which the rights of litigants are here determined. Some .theorists have argued that all laws for the collection of debts should be abolished, and that may yet become the policy of a sister State. Will a citizen of such State, sued here, then be clothed in our courts with immunity from the attacks of his creditors. The right to arrest the body of a debtor differs in various States, and in some is entirely abolished. Oan a citizen of such States arrested here for tort, go free because at home his creditor would not have that remedy. When a non-resident litigating here is allowed the same rights which our citizens enjoy, he can claim nothing further.

These principles require ,the order appealed from to be affirmed, with costs.

Present, — Barnard, P. J., Dykman and Pratt, JJ.

Order of county judge affirmed, with costs.

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

Pratt, J.:

The court below acquired jurisdiction of the person of the judgment debtor, and he is fully amenable to its process. The remedies to which parties are entitled, and the operation of which they must abide, depend upon the law of the forum. To what extent their ■operation shall be restrained or limited by exemption laws must also depend upon the le^e fori. A non-resident coming into this State' may claim the protection of our laws equally with our own citizens. But while within our borders he may not claim to be outside the laws by which the rights of litigants are here determined. Some .theorists have argued that all laws for the collection of debts should be abolished, and that may yet become the policy of a sister State. Will a citizen of such State, sued here, then be clothed in our courts with immunity from the attacks of his creditors. The right to arrest the body of a debtor differs in various States, and in some is entirely abolished. Oan a citizen of such States arrested here for tort, go free because at home his creditor would not have that remedy. When a non-resident litigating here is allowed the same rights which our citizens enjoy, he can claim nothing further.

These principles require ,the order appealed from to be affirmed, with costs.

Present, — Barnard, P. J., Dykman and Pratt, JJ.

Order of county judge affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buchanan-v-hunt-nysupct-1884.