Harnischfeger Sales Corp. v. Spellman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harnischfeger Sales Corp. v. Spellman

256 A.D. 879, 9 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 25, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D. 879 (Harnischfeger Sales Corp. v. Spellman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harnischfeger Sales Corp. v. Spellman, 256 A.D. 879, 9 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint in an action of replevin, rendered after a trial. The subject-matter of the action was a P. & H. Model 300A Excavator. It had been sold by plaintiff to a road construction corporation on a conditional sales contract. It was delivered to the vendee at the town of Colton, and it there remained until after the making of the conditional sales contract. A copy of the contract was filed in the office of the clerk of the town of Clifton. This was not the proper clerk’s office, and it did not become a lien on the excavator as against third parties. The defendant purchased the excavator on a sheriff’s sale under an execution and under an attachment. His title is good. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., McNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint in an action of replevin, rendered after a trial. The subject-matter of the action was a P. & H. Model 300A Excavator. It had been sold by plaintiff to a road construction corporation on a conditional sales contract. It was delivered to the vendee at the town of Colton, and it there remained until after the making of the conditional sales contract. A copy of the contract was filed in the office of the clerk of the town of Clifton. This was not the proper clerk’s office, and it did not become a lien on the excavator as against third parties. The defendant purchased the excavator on a sheriff’s sale under an execution and under an attachment. His title is good. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., McNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D. 879, 9 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harnischfeger-sales-corp-v-spellman-nyappdiv-1939.