Glenville Woolen Co. v. Ripley
Glenville Woolen Co. v. Ripley
Opinion of the Court
The motion must be denied. It is based upon the ground that the respondent has no subsisting interest in the demand sought to be recovered in the* action: that the entire interest therein has become vested in attaching creditors, in whose behalf it is the duty of the sheriff to collect the money ; that the creditor who employed the attorney who prosecuted the suit to judgment, in the superior court, and who is the attorney of the respondents in this court, has no interest in the demand, as it is claimed that his attachment was never served.
From the papers it appears that there have been conflicting claims to any money that may be recovered in the suit, made by persons not parties to the record; and that these claims have been the subject of litigation between such parties, in an action commenced in the supreme court by the party in whose behalf this motion is made, against the other claimants, and perhaps others ; that judgment has been rendered in such action, declaring the moving party entitled to the fund, and restraining the other parties from interfering therewith; and that an appeal has been taken from such judgment, to the general term of the supreme court, which appeal is still pending.
This court cannot, for the purpose of this motion, in the exercise of its discretion, regard this judgment
Motion denied.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- THE GLENVILLE WOOLEN COMPANY against RIPLEY
- Status
- Published