From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilewicz v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1902
69 App. Div. 438 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)

Opinion

March Term, 1902.

John P. Donnelly [ K.C. McDonald and M.V. McDonald with him on the brief], for the appellant.

David Hirshfield, for the respondent.


Nathan Bockschitsky recovered a judgment against the plaintiff in this action in the Municipal Court for groceries sold and delivered. An execution was duly issued pursuant to said judgment to the defendant, a city marshal, who levied upon a certain horse, harness and wagon. The plaintiff, thereupon, brought this action to recover a horse, harness and wagon, on the ground that the said property was exempt from levy and sale. Upon the trial the learned court decided that the plaintiff had failed to establish a cause of action and dismissed the complaint, with ten dollars costs. From the judgment entered appeal comes to this court.

The judgment should be affirmed. The plaintiff's evidence fails to show that the plaintiff made any claim of exemption to the officer, or that he made a demand upon the officer for the return of the property on the ground of an exemption, and we are of the opinion that an exemption under the provisions of section 1391 of the Code of Civil Procedure is a privilege and must be claimed by the party entitled to it at some time before the property is sold, or it will be deemed to have been waived. ( Russell v. Dean, 30 Hun, 242; Field v. Ingreham, 15 Misc. Rep. 529; Wilcox v. Howe, 59 Hun, 268; Matter of King, 24 App. Div. 605, 607; Twinam v. Swart, 4 Lans. 263.) The burden of proof was upon the plaintiff to show that the property was exempt and that the plaintiff had asserted his rights under the law. ( Knapp v. O'Neill, 46 Hun, 317.) Having failed to produce the evidence to support the cause of action alleged, this court is in no position to grant further rights to the appellant. If the property has not been sold, he may still assert his claim for exemption properly and endeavor to establish his right in another action.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

All concurred.

Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Gilewicz v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1902
69 App. Div. 438 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
Case details for

Gilewicz v. Goldberg

Case Details

Full title:CONSTANTINE GILEWICZ, Appellant, v . DAVID GOLDBERG, One of the City…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1902

Citations

69 App. Div. 438 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
74 N.Y.S. 984

Citing Cases

Zadar Constr. v. Charter Woodworking Corp.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. A review of the entire record…

Tuckman v. Hayward

In order to give effect to both of the cited sections, it is held that the exemption afforded by section 665…