¶1The proceedings could be returned only to this court. No jurisdiction in these cases is given to the superior court of the city of New-York by the .statute creating that court. The judges of that court, however, have a right to act individually on applications to them under this act; but when they so officiate, they do so as commissioners of this court. The proof of the residence "abroad of the defendant was sufficient, but there should have been evidence that the defendant was indebted within this state, either by showing that the contract was made here, or that the creditors resided here. (2 Caines, 319.) In this respect there is a total want of evidence, for which cause the proceedings are set aside.
2 Wend. 298
In re Fitch
Decided May 15, 1829
New York Supreme Court · decided 1829-05-15
Motion to set aside an attachment. A warrant was issue(f by the Hon. J. O. Hoffman, one of the justices of the suPe™r court °f the city of New-York, the property of the debtor was attached, and the proceedings were returned to this court.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1829-05-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 1942
9 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →