Ribak v. Worhaftig

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Ribak v. Worhaftig

155 N.Y.S. 408

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 3, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 155 N.Y.S. 408 (Ribak v. Worhaftig) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ribak v. Worhaftig, 155 N.Y.S. 408 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEARN, J.

The remedy by attachment is a harsh one, and before one’s business may be seized by the sheriff upon an allegation of fraud there must be evidence submitted to the court sufficient to establish the fraud. The papers upon which the vacated attachment was granted merely state why plaintiffs suspect the defendant of having disposed of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. They contain no evidence upon which fraud may be fairly inferred, and the very grounds of plaintiffs’ suspicion are consistent with honest business dealings.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

PAGE, J., concurs. BIJUR, J., dissents.

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

SHEARN, J.

The remedy by attachment is a harsh one, and before one’s business may be seized by the sheriff upon an allegation of fraud there must be evidence submitted to the court sufficient to establish the fraud. The papers upon which the vacated attachment was granted merely state why plaintiffs suspect the defendant of having disposed of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. They contain no evidence upon which fraud may be fairly inferred, and the very grounds of plaintiffs’ suspicion are consistent with honest business dealings.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

PAGE, J., concurs. BIJUR, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 N.Y.S. 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ribak-v-worhaftig-nyappterm-1915.