Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Edw. Ch. 362

Springer v. Vanderpool

New York Court of Chancery

Decided February 5, 1844

New York Court of Chancery · decided 1844-02-05

Judgment creditor’s bill against Jacob Vanderpool (the debtor) and Frederick S. Vanderpool, to whom he had assigned certain leasehold premises. A decree was had; and thereby the assignment was declared fraudulent and void and the assignee, Frederick S. Vanderpool, was ordered to join in assigning to a receiver, who had been duly appointed. A motion was now made for an attachment against the defendants, the Vanderpools, for not executing a transfer to the receiver.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1873

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1844-02-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Vice-Chancellor

¶1This case falls within the chancellor’s decision in Sedgwick v. Cleveland, 7 Paige’s C. *363R. 287. The suit has become defective, not abated, by the bankruptcy of the complainant. It may still be prosecuted, but not by or in the name of the complainant. The assignee in bankruptcy may go on with it—and such is the effect of the provision of § 3 of the bankrupt act; but in doing so, the assignee must conform to the practice of this court by making himself a party by filing a supplemental bill as shown by the chancellor in Sedgwick v. Cleveland.

¶2If the assignee will not consent to do this, then, perhaps, the present complainant may be allowed to proceed, by a supplemental bill, making his assignee a party defendant and suggesting his refusal to proceed with the suit as a complainant, &c.(a) However that may be, the present motion, for an attachment against the defendants must be denied, with costs to be taxed.

¶3See, Brebner v. Thompson, 2 Molloy, 433, and note there.

/4/edwch/362 · .json · Public domain