From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacDonald v. Manice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 1, 1901
65 App. Div. 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)

Opinion

November Term, 1901.

Present — Van Brunt, P.J., O'Brien, Ingraham, McLaughlin and Hatch, JJ.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


We deem it unnecessary to consider the question of residence, for the reason that there are two valid objections to the attachment. The first is that the affidavit and complaint upon which the warrant of attachment was granted do not set forth a cause of action against the defendant. ( Carrier v. United Paper Co., 73 Hun, 287; Pomeroy v. Ricketts, 27 id. 242.) The second is that the order herein having been granted upon a condition with which the defendant has complied, the plaintiff has obtained an advantage, and is not in a position to demand a reversal of the order. The order should, therefore, be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

MacDonald v. Manice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 1, 1901
65 App. Div. 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)
Case details for

MacDonald v. Manice

Case Details

Full title:Ranald H. Macdonald, Appellant, v. Caroline F. Manice, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1901

Citations

65 App. Div. 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)

Citing Cases

Outerbridge v. Campbell

(See Wessels v. Boettcher, 69 Hun, 306; affd., 138 N.Y. 654; Carrier v. United Paper Co., 73 Hun, 287;…