In re McGrath

S.D. New York

In re McGrath

16 F. Cas. 126, 5 Ben. 183, 5 Nat. Bank. Reg. 254, 1871 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided June 3, 1871·Published

Opinion

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

The register is correct in his conclusion. On the testimony, the landlord ought to have applied to this court immediately after the marshal took possession of the goods and premises, to have the goods and furniture removed and the premises vacated by the marshal. Such motion would have been granted. If he had an opportunity to rent the premises, he should so have represented to this court

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

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

The register is correct in his conclusion. On the testimony, the landlord ought to have applied to this court immediately after the marshal took possession of the goods and premises, to have the goods and furniture removed and the premises vacated by the marshal. Such motion would have been granted. If he had an opportunity to rent the premises, he should so have represented to this court

In re McGrath, 16 F. Cas. 126, 5 Ben. 183, 5 Nat. Bank. Reg. 254, 1871 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219 (S.D.N.Y. 1871).

Pincite

16 F. Cas. 126 (In re McGrath) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.