106 N.Y. 619 | NY | 1887
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *621
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *622
We think the appeal should prevail. As for the defendant of record, its dissolution put an end to the action; and at the time of the rendition of the judgment it had neither legal existence, capacity to be sued, nor any property against which a judgment could be enforced, while the receiver, who by authority of law had taken its effects, had not been made a party to the action in which the judgment was recovered. It is, therefore, plain that the funds in his hands should not be affected by it, unless by interference or otherwise, under the direction of the court appointing him, he has made himself responsible for the final result of the litigation between the parties. (McCulloch v.Norwood,
The order appealed from should, therefore, be reversed, and the order of the Special Term affirmed, with costs of the appellant in all courts to be paid by the respondent.
All concur.
Ordered accordingly. *626