Martin v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martin v. Miller

230 A.D. 401, 245 N.Y.S. 37, 1930 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8624

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

DecidedOctober 10, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 230 A.D. 401 (Martin v. Miller) 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

Martin v. Miller, 230 A.D. 401, 245 N.Y.S. 37, 1930 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8624 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondents’ original complaint in replevin states a complete cause of action inasmuch as it alleges demand before action brought, and that defendants’ levy was made against the protest of respondents (chattel mortgagees) and with full notice of respondents’ rights. Respondents were entitled to possession of the property as against the sheriff, even if the judgment upon which the levy under execution was based was valid, there being no claim that respondents’ chattel mortgage was fraudulent or void. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1089, subd. 3; Leadbetter v. Leadbetter, 125 N. Y. 290; Crutts v. Daly, 84 Misc. 192.)

The new allegations in the proposed substituted complaint are immaterial, and the order granting permission to serve another complaint and giving respondents a trial preference should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgcomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.

Order entered April 25, 1930, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondents’ original complaint in replevin states a complete cause of action inasmuch as it alleges demand before action brought, and that defendants’ levy was made against the protest of respondents (chattel mortgagees) and with full notice of respondents’ rights. Respondents were entitled to possession of the property as against the sheriff, even if the judgment upon which the levy under execution was based was valid, there being no claim that respondents’ chattel mortgage was fraudulent or void. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1089, subd. 3; Leadbetter v. Leadbetter, 125 N. Y. 290; Crutts v. Daly, 84 Misc. 192.)

The new allegations in the proposed substituted complaint are immaterial, and the order granting permission to serve another complaint and giving respondents a trial preference should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgcomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.

Order entered April 25, 1930, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 A.D. 401, 245 N.Y.S. 37, 1930 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-miller-nyappdiv-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack