Conrad Baking Co. v. Kunkel

160 N.Y.S. 841
New York Supreme Court·Decided September 16, 1916·Published

Opinion

RODENBECK, J.

An order of attachment was obtained by the plaintiff, and subsequently the defendant became insolvent, was adjudged a bankrupt, and a trustee in bankruptcy was appointed. This is a motion by the defendant to vacate the attachment on the ground of his bankruptcy, and is opposed on the ground that the trustee, and not the bankrupt, must move to vacate the attachment. The only answer made by the defendant to this position is that section 682 of the Code of Civil Procedure authorizes the “defendant,” or a person who has acquired the lien upon, or interest in, his property after it' was attached, to apply to vacate or modify the warrant of attachment. This provision of the Code of Civil Procedure applies only in cases where the defendant has an interest in the property attached, and does not apply to a case where a trustee in bankruptcy of his property has been appointed. In the latter case he has no interest to protect, and the motion to vacate the attachment must be made by the trustee. Bankruptcy Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, §§ 67f, 70, 30 Stat. 564, 565 (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, §§ 9651, 9654); National Bank v. Spencer, 53 App. Div. 547, 65 N. Y. Supp. 1001; McCarty v. Light, 155 App. Div. 36, 41, 139 N. Y. Supp. 853; Matter of Benedict, 37 Misc. Rep. 230, 75 N. Y. Supp. 165.

The motion is therefore denied, with $10 costs.

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

Conrad Baking Co. v. Kunkel, 160 N.Y.S. 841 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1916).

160 N.Y.S. 841 (Conrad Baking Co. v. Kunkel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

National Bank & Loan Co. v. Spencer
53 A.D. 547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
McCarty v. Light
155 A.D. 36 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
In re Benedict
37 Misc. 230 (New York Supreme Court, 1902)