Daly v. Wood

New York Supreme Court

Daly v. Wood

29 Misc. 105, 60 N.Y.S. 194

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1899

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 Misc. 105 (Daly v. Wood) 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

Daly v. Wood, 29 Misc. 105, 60 N.Y.S. 194 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Gtldeesleeve, J.

This is a motion to place a cause on the preferred calendar, on the ground that the sole plaintiff is a receiver. Section 791 of the Code, subdivision 5, provides for a preference in cases where “ a receiver appointed by the court ” is the sole plaintiff or sole defendant. In the case at bar the receiver was appointed in supplementary proceedings. Section 2464 of the Code provides for the appointment of a receiver of the property of a judgment debtor by “ the judge to whom the order or warrant is returnable,” etc. In the case at bar the complaint sets forth the appointment of the receiver by Justice Hascall, of [106]*106the City Court. I do not think that the preferred calendar should be weighed down with cases instituted by receivers in supplementary proceedings, as a strict interpretation of the statute does not appear to require it. The motion for a preference should be denied, but without costs. The request for the removal of the cause from the Special Term calendar, made on behalf of defendants, is not properly before me, as no notice of motion has been served.

Motion denied, without costs.

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

Gtldeesleeve, J.

This is a motion to place a cause on the preferred calendar, on the ground that the sole plaintiff is a receiver. Section 791 of the Code, subdivision 5, provides for a preference in cases where “ a receiver appointed by the court ” is the sole plaintiff or sole defendant. In the case at bar the receiver was appointed in supplementary proceedings. Section 2464 of the Code provides for the appointment of a receiver of the property of a judgment debtor by “ the judge to whom the order or warrant is returnable,” etc. In the case at bar the complaint sets forth the appointment of the receiver by Justice Hascall, of [106]*106the City Court. I do not think that the preferred calendar should be weighed down with cases instituted by receivers in supplementary proceedings, as a strict interpretation of the statute does not appear to require it. The motion for a preference should be denied, but without costs. The request for the removal of the cause from the Special Term calendar, made on behalf of defendants, is not properly before me, as no notice of motion has been served.

Motion denied, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Misc. 105, 60 N.Y.S. 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daly-v-wood-nysupct-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack