Rinchey v. Stryker
31 N.Y. 140 | NY | 1865
The court were of the opinion that the sheriff was entitled to defend, on the ground that the goods seized were the prop-" erty of Cartwright and Hazzard, who had disposed of the same with intent to defraud, &c., then* creditors, and that the plaintiff, in receiving the property, had notice of the fraudulent intent, &c.
The case is reported at length in 26 How. Pr., p. 75. The opinion was written by Balcom, J., in which all concurred, except Emott, J., who-did not vote.