Hamilton v. Mann

New York Court of Chancery

Hamilton v. Mann

2 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 43, 1842 N.Y. LEXIS 525

DecidedJuly 19, 1842

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 43 (Hamilton v. Mann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hamilton v. Mann, 2 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 43, 1842 N.Y. LEXIS 525 (N.Y. 1842).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

This is an application for the appointment of a receiver of the property of the defendant Mann, a judgment debtor against whom an execution has been returned unsatisfied, and also of the property of the defendant Franklin, upon the ground that it has been fraudulently transferred to him. The application is not opposed as to the property of the judgment debtor, if she has any, and a reference is directed accordingly to a master in the county where she resides. The answer, however, appears to contain a full denial of the alledged fraud in the sale to Franklin; and that, in this stage of the cause, is sufficient to prevent the application being granted as to him. So much of the motion, therefore, as seeks the appointment of a receiver of the property assigned or sold to the defendant Franklin, is denied, with $10 costs.

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

The Chancellor.

This is an application for the appointment of a receiver of the property of the defendant Mann, a judgment debtor against whom an execution has been returned unsatisfied, and also of the property of the defendant Franklin, upon the ground that it has been fraudulently transferred to him. The application is not opposed as to the property of the judgment debtor, if she has any, and a reference is directed accordingly to a master in the county where she resides. The answer, however, appears to contain a full denial of the alledged fraud in the sale to Franklin; and that, in this stage of the cause, is sufficient to prevent the application being granted as to him. So much of the motion, therefore, as seeks the appointment of a receiver of the property assigned or sold to the defendant Franklin, is denied, with $10 costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 43, 1842 N.Y. LEXIS 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-mann-nychanct-1842.