From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brand v. Hasbrouck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1914
165 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)

Opinion

November, 1914.


No written notice of this accounting proceeding ordered against the receiver was given to the surety on the receiver's official bond under Code of Civil Procedure, section 715, which requirement means a notice in writing. ( Erving v. Mayor, etc., 131 N.Y. 133.) Hence the accounting proceedings, and the referee's findings, with the orders of the court, made thereon, as against the surety, had no effect. ( Stratton v. City Trust, Safe Deposit S. Co., 86 App. Div. 551.) The evidence of the receiver's default and misfeasance, being based only on these accounting proceedings, left the complaint totally unsupported as to the surety, so that it was rightly dismissed. The judgment is, therefore, affirmed, with costs, Jenks, P.J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

Brand v. Hasbrouck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1914
165 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)
Case details for

Brand v. Hasbrouck

Case Details

Full title:Leopold Brand, Appellant, v. Frank Hasbrouck, as Superintendent of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1914

Citations

165 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)
149 N.Y.S. 1072