Lange v. Lewi

The Superior Court of New York City

Lange v. Lewi

26 Jones & S. 265, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 418

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedJune 27, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 26 Jones & S. 265 (Lange v. Lewi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lange v. Lewi, 26 Jones & S. 265, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 418 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

This is an appeal from an order denying plaintiff’s motion to compel delivery by sheriff to plaintiff of property which the sheriff on plaintiff’s requisition had taken in replevin. It appears that the defendant is a warehouseman; that he received the goods in question from one Alexander Agar on storage and issued his receipt therefor, and that he prevented a delivery to the plaintiff by delivering to the sheriff the notice, affidavit and undertaking required by § 1704 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The affidavit was sufficient for the reasons stated by the learned judge below, and we can see no merit in any of the points raised by the appellant.

The order should be affirmed with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Pee Cueiam.

This is an appeal from an order denying plaintiff’s motion to compel delivery by sheriff to plaintiff of property which the sheriff on plaintiff’s requisition had taken in replevin. It appears that the defendant is a warehouseman; that he received the goods in question from one Alexander Agar on storage and issued his receipt therefor, and that he prevented a delivery to the plaintiff by delivering to the sheriff the notice, affidavit and undertaking required by § 1704 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The affidavit was sufficient for the reasons stated by the learned judge below, and we can see no merit in any of the points raised by the appellant.

The order should be affirmed with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 Jones & S. 265, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lange-v-lewi-nysuperctnyc-1890.