From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stevens v. Coolidge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1912
154 App. Div. 884 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)

Summary

In Stevens v. Coolidge (supra) a brokerage partnership of Stow Co. discontinued its business in April, 1907, because of inability to meet its obligations.

Summary of this case from Matter of Gruner

Opinion

December, 1912.

Present — Ingraham, P.J., (dissenting), McLaughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion.


I dissent on the ground that no lien on the Stock Exchange seat was established; and that, considering the nature of a Stock Exchange seat, there was no property to which a lien could attach.


Summaries of

Stevens v. Coolidge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1912
154 App. Div. 884 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)

In Stevens v. Coolidge (supra) a brokerage partnership of Stow Co. discontinued its business in April, 1907, because of inability to meet its obligations.

Summary of this case from Matter of Gruner
Case details for

Stevens v. Coolidge

Case Details

Full title:EMILY C. STEVENS, Respondent, v . HENRY COOLIDGE, Appellant, and WILLIAM…

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1912

Citations

154 App. Div. 884 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)
138 N.Y.S. 1144

Citing Cases

Matter of Gruner

When they became available, the lien attached. (See Ketcham v. Provost, 156 App. Div. 477, 484, affd. 215…

Hyney v. Nielsen

The prior lien created by the rules has been satisfied. ( Matter of Gruner, 295 N.Y. 510; Stevens v.…