Moritz v. Kaliske

New York Supreme Court

Moritz v. Kaliske

28 N.Y.S. 380, 31 Abb. N. Cas. 49, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 867

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1893

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 28 N.Y.S. 380 (Moritz v. Kaliske) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moritz v. Kaliske, 28 N.Y.S. 380, 31 Abb. N. Cas. 49, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 867 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

PATTERSON, J.

In People v. Van Buren, 136 N. Y. 252, 32 N. E. 775, the court of appeals has settled in the affirmative the theretofore much debated and very doubtful question of the right of an attaching creditor to maintain a suit in aid of his attachment, and to enforce the lien thereof, where the debtor has fraudulently" disposed of property. It is also held that in such a suit a plaintiff is not a mere creditor at large, but has a lien, and may enjoin the removal of property of the debtor from the jurisdiction of the court when danger of such removal is shown. The averments of the complaint in this action bring it directly within the principle of the decision referred to, and, on an examination of the affidavits submitted on this motion, I think sufficient is disclosed to require the- continuance of the injunction pendente lite, and until a full and thorough investigation of the whole case may be had upon the trial. On the plaintiff giving an undertaking in an amount to be fixed on the settlement of the form of the order, the injunction will be continued until the hearing and decision of the cause.

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

PATTERSON, J.

In People v. Van Buren, 136 N. Y. 252, 32 N. E. 775, the court of appeals has settled in the affirmative the theretofore much debated and very doubtful question of the right of an attaching creditor to maintain a suit in aid of his attachment, and to enforce the lien thereof, where the debtor has fraudulently" disposed of property. It is also held that in such a suit a plaintiff is not a mere creditor at large, but has a lien, and may enjoin the removal of property of the debtor from the jurisdiction of the court when danger of such removal is shown. The averments of the complaint in this action bring it directly within the principle of the decision referred to, and, on an examination of the affidavits submitted on this motion, I think sufficient is disclosed to require the- continuance of the injunction pendente lite, and until a full and thorough investigation of the whole case may be had upon the trial. On the plaintiff giving an undertaking in an amount to be fixed on the settlement of the form of the order, the injunction will be continued until the hearing and decision of the cause.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 N.Y.S. 380, 31 Abb. N. Cas. 49, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moritz-v-kaliske-nysupct-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack