Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

26 Misc. 275

Gibney v. Reilly

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1899

New York Supreme Court · decided 1899-02-15

<p>Supplementary proceedings — No property for a receiver to take.</p> <p>A motion for a receiver in supplementary proceedings should! be denied where no property of the judgment debtor has been discovered except some uncertain contingent fees in untried actions.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1929

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1899-02-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gildersleeve, J.

¶1The examination in supplementary proceedings failed to discover any property of the defendant, except a contingent fee in a few cases, which have not been determined, and the result of which as well as the amount to be recovered are speculative and uncertain. The rule is well settled that proceedings supplementary to execution are directed against property which, at the time of the order for his examination, the judgment debtor has in his possession or under his control, or which is actually due to him; and no property subsequently acquired, no future earnings of any kind, and no earnings for personal services rendered within sixty days preceding such order, if necessary for the use of his family, can be reached. See Matter of Trustees, 22 Misc. Rep. 645; Columbian Institute v. Cregan, 11 Civ. Pro. 87. These speculative and uncertain contingent fees, in untried actions, cannot be regarded as property in the possession or under the control of defendant at the time of the order for his examination, nor can they be said to be property actually due to him at such time, for the purposes of these proceedings. As there appears to be nothing to receive, it follows that the motion for a receiver should be denied.

¶2Motion denied.

/26/misc/275 · .json · Public domain