Gordon v. Fox

New York Supreme Court

Gordon v. Fox

11 N.Y.S. 5, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 571

DecidedJanuary 23, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 11 N.Y.S. 5 (Gordon v. Fox) 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

Gordon v. Fox, 11 N.Y.S. 5, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 571 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Barrett, J.

The rule stated in Cowdin v. Cram, 3 Edw. Ch. 231, has not been affected by section 550 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That rule confines the writ of ne exeat in actions for specific performance to cases against the vendee. The principle is that the writ is in the nature of equitable bail, readily fixed where the purchase money is specified, but difficult of ascertainment when the action is against the vendor. Here the complaint shows nothing as to the pecuniary element. The affidavit states that the interest sought to be recovered is worth $250,000, but no facts are stated justifying the assertion. In view of the nature of the thing agreed to be assigned, the statement is necessarily a mere assertion; in fact, an opinion. There was nothing upon which to fix bail at $5,000, or any other sum, and the order should therefore be discharged.

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

Barrett, J.

The rule stated in Cowdin v. Cram, 3 Edw. Ch. 231, has not been affected by section 550 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That rule confines the writ of ne exeat in actions for specific performance to cases against the vendee. The principle is that the writ is in the nature of equitable bail, readily fixed where the purchase money is specified, but difficult of ascertainment when the action is against the vendor. Here the complaint shows nothing as to the pecuniary element. The affidavit states that the interest sought to be recovered is worth $250,000, but no facts are stated justifying the assertion. In view of the nature of the thing agreed to be assigned, the statement is necessarily a mere assertion; in fact, an opinion. There was nothing upon which to fix bail at $5,000, or any other sum, and the order should therefore be discharged.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 N.Y.S. 5, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-fox-nysupct-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack