Majority
p. 526J. Bertram Clements, Respondent, v. Nathan L. Doblin, Doing Business as Doblin Company, Appellant. (Argued October 2, 1924; decided October 21, 1924.)
Headnote
Attachmen t — execution — levy upon interest of defendant in property consigned to factors.Clements v. Doblin, 209 App. Div. 208 , affirmed.
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 2, 1924, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to vacate a levy made
p. 527
under a. warrant of attachment directed against the property of defendant in the hands of a certain factor.
The following questions were certified:
“ 1. Under the facts appearing in this case, was the sheriff of the county of New York authorized to make a levy upon the interest of defendant in the property consigned to his factors?
“2. Was the sheriff of the county of New York authorized to make a levy upon assets of defendant then unliquidated, contingent as to existence and as to amount, upon the striking in May, 1927, of a balance of the account between defendant and his factors, and which accounting to ascertain said balance, is compellable and obtainable only in equity?
“ 3. Is the interest which a consignor has in merchandise consigned to his factors and in the proceeds therefrom under an agreement with his factors whereby the factors have a continuing hen upon all merchandise so consigned by the consignor and upon all the proceeds therefrom over a period of years, for advances, charges and guaranteed commissions to factors, such an interest as is subject to levy under a warrant of attachment? ”
J. Leo Rothschild for appellant.
Jacob J. Podell and David L. Podell for respondent.
Order affirmed, with costs; first and third questions certified answered in the affirmative, second question not answered; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.