Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
New York Supreme Court, 1888

Newgas v. Solomon

Newgas v. Solomon
New York Supreme Court · Decided January 15, 1888 · Andrews
20 Abb. N. Cas. 175

Counsel

Blumenstiel & Hirsch, for the defendant and the motion., Townsend, Dyett & Einstien, for the plaintiff, opposed.

Newgas v. Solomon

Opinion of the Court

Andrews, J.

The general term of this department has held that the pendency of an appeal from a judgment *176is not a sufficient reason for delaying to issue an execution thereon against the person,* and it seems to me that, a fortiori, the pendency of supplementary proceedings will not justify the plaintiff in delaying to issue such an execution, even if it be true, as claimed, that such proceedings cannot be continued after the body execution has been issued.

So held in Havemeyer Sugar Refining Co. v. Taussig, 19 Abb. N. C. 57.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.