Martz v. Cohen

145 Misc. 284, 259 N.Y.S. 302, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1020
City of New York Municipal Court·Decided December 4, 1931·Published

Opinion

Ryan, J.

Motion to vacate order in supplementary proceedings, dated October 1, 1931, and all proceedings and orders based thereon, is granted. The order is jurisdietionally defective in that the affidavit upon which it is based fails to allege, as required by section 780 of the Civil Practice Act, that the debtor has property which he unjustly refuses to apply toward the satisfaction of the judgment, (Matter of Smith v. Haverty’s Stables, 157 App. Div. 777.) Nor is there allegation that any demand for the application of his property was made upon the debtor, (Friedlander v. Lehman, 101 N. Y. Supp. 252.) The order also improperly required the debtor to appear for examination in a county other than the one in which he resided or had a place for the transaction of business. Order filed.

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

Martz v. Cohen, 145 Misc. 284, 259 N.Y.S. 302, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1020 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1931).

145 Misc. 284 (Martz v. Cohen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Haverty's Stables
157 A.D. 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
Friedlander v. Lehman
101 N.Y.S. 252 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)