New York Supreme Court, 1916

Fleitmann v. Union Bank

Fleitmann v. Union Bank
New York Supreme Court · Decided February 15, 1916 · Chester
93 Misc. 595; 158 N.Y.S. 439

Counsel

Rockwood & Haldane, for plaintiff., Joseph G. Dean, for defendants.

Fleitmann v. Union Bank

Opinion of the Court

Chester, J.

The plaintiff by her complaint in this . action seeks to restrain the defendants from selling certain securities held as collateral to the notes under which á judgment has been recovered by the defendants against her in another action, pending the determination of an appeal from such judgment alleging that she was unable to give security to stay execution thereunder.

If this complaint states a good cause of action, a way has been discovered to nullify the provisions of law requiring security to obtain a stay of execution, pending an appeal from a judgment which would be just as effective as a repeal of such provisions. With the law as it is I cannot believe the equity powers of the court can be properly exercised for such a purpose and therefore, I think, that no cause of action has been alleged. The demurrer is sustained with, costs.

Demurred sustained, with costs.

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