From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Biederman v. Edson Co., Incorporated

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 31, 1926
128 Misc. 455 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)

Opinion

December 31, 1926.

Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Robert I. Rogin, for the appellants.

Max J. LeBoyer, for the respondent.


Although a levy appears to have been made under Iser's judgment on March 1, 1926, the evidence sufficiently indicates that the judgment creditor there and his attorney had notice at the time that title to the automobile had been reserved to defendant Edson Company, Inc., under an unfiled conditional sale agreement with the judgment debtor. Consequently defendant Edson Company, Inc., was entitled to possession of the automobile until payment of the judgment which it thereafter obtained in its action to foreclose its vendor's lien. (See Pers. Prop. Law, § 65, as added by Laws of 1922, chap. 642.)

The judgment must, therefore, be reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and the complaint dismissed.

All concur; present, BIJUR, O'MALLEY and LEVY, JJ.


Summaries of

Biederman v. Edson Co., Incorporated

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 31, 1926
128 Misc. 455 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
Case details for

Biederman v. Edson Co., Incorporated

Case Details

Full title:MAURICE BIEDERMAN, as Receiver in Supplementary Proceedings of MAGNETIC…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 31, 1926

Citations

128 Misc. 455 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
219 N.Y.S. 115