John R. Philip, Inc. v. Langella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

John R. Philip, Inc. v. Langella

285 A.D. 1038, 140 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6597

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

DecidedApril 26, 1955

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 285 A.D. 1038 (John R. Philip, Inc. v. Langella) 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

John R. Philip, Inc. v. Langella, 285 A.D. 1038, 140 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6597 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The trust fund remedy prescribed by section 36-a of the Lien Law is not exclusive (Lien Law, § 76) and does not prevent a creditor from pursuing his ordinary remedies. Moreover, in this instance, the money was not effectively transferred beyond the control of the debtor. The judgment creditors’ rights in the fund in the receiver’s hands should, as a matter of discretion, be determined in such further proceedings herein as they may be advised to take. This will allow the other creditors who may have been misled into relying on the escrow agreement to make such claims as they can. They may well not have any effective way of asserting such claims, but on that we do not now pass.

Accordingly, the order should be modified to strike (1) the direction that the fund be held by the receiver subject to distribution in accordance with section 36-a of the Lien Law, and (2) the denial of the request that the fund be first applied to satisfy the judgments of the judgment creditors and, as so modified, affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements of this appeal to appellant. Settle order.

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

Per Curiam.

The trust fund remedy prescribed by section 36-a of the Lien Law is not exclusive (Lien Law, § 76) and does not prevent a creditor from pursuing his ordinary remedies. Moreover, in this instance, the money was not effectively transferred beyond the control of the debtor. The judgment creditors’ rights in the fund in the receiver’s hands should, as a matter of discretion, be determined in such further proceedings herein as they may be advised to take. This will allow the other creditors who may have been misled into relying on the escrow agreement to make such claims as they can. They may well not have any effective way of asserting such claims, but on that we do not now pass.

Accordingly, the order should be modified to strike (1) the direction that the fund be held by the receiver subject to distribution in accordance with section 36-a of the Lien Law, and (2) the denial of the request that the fund be first applied to satisfy the judgments of the judgment creditors and, as so modified, affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements of this appeal to appellant. Settle order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 1038, 140 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-r-philip-inc-v-langella-nyappdiv-1955.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack