Carpy v. Edlinger

City of New York Municipal Court

Carpy v. Edlinger

5 N.Y.S. 419, 25 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3012

DecidedMay 31, 1889

StatusPublished

This text of 5 N.Y.S. 419 (Carpy v. Edlinger) 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

Carpy v. Edlinger, 5 N.Y.S. 419, 25 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3012 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendants are indemnitors of judgment creditors of Frank Maurer, and the property claimed herein was levied upon by the sheriff by virtue of an execution against one Frank Maurer. The sheriff was sued originally, and the defendants as indemnitors were substituted in his place. The jury found that the title was not in the judgment debtor, and under the evidence John Maurer, the brother of the judgment debtor, got but ■a qualified or conditional title, which was by force of the arrangement defeated when the sheriff seized the property. John Maurer did not intervene •as a claimant, and did not ask to be made a party defendant, nor did the present defendants seek to join him as a party. He does not complain of the judgment, and, as the jury found that Frank Maurer had no title, the defendants, ns his judgment creditors, acquired no right to the property, and cannot se[420]*420piously complain that the jury so found. No error was committed, to their prejudice. It follows that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed,, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendants are indemnitors of judgment creditors of Frank Maurer, and the property claimed herein was levied upon by the sheriff by virtue of an execution against one Frank Maurer. The sheriff was sued originally, and the defendants as indemnitors were substituted in his place. The jury found that the title was not in the judgment debtor, and under the evidence John Maurer, the brother of the judgment debtor, got but ■a qualified or conditional title, which was by force of the arrangement defeated when the sheriff seized the property. John Maurer did not intervene •as a claimant, and did not ask to be made a party defendant, nor did the present defendants seek to join him as a party. He does not complain of the judgment, and, as the jury found that Frank Maurer had no title, the defendants, ns his judgment creditors, acquired no right to the property, and cannot se[420]*420piously complain that the jury so found. No error was committed, to their prejudice. It follows that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed,, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 N.Y.S. 419, 25 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3012, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carpy-v-edlinger-nynyccityct-1889.