Nealis v. Insley — 67 N.Y.S. 235

Majority

p. 235

NEALIS v. INSLEY et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

November 12, 1900.)

Headnote

Receivers—Appointment—Title Acquired.

All that a receiver takes by an appointment Is the right, title, and interest that the persons for whom he is appointed receiver have in the property at the time the appointment is made

Appeal from municipal court, borough of Manhattan, Second district.

Action by James J. Nealis, as receiver, against Bernard Insley and-another. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before TRUAX, P. J., and DUGEO and SCOTT, JJ.

F. J. Keurzi, for appellant.

J. J. Vanse, for respondents.

All that the receiver took by his appointment was the right, title, and interest that the persons for whom he was .appointed receiver had in the property at the time the appointment was made. The justice before whom the case was tried has found that the lease of the defendants to the respondents, Insley and Lepovetech, was made before the appellant was appointed receiver, and there is evidence to sustain that finding. It is immaterial whether they had or had not actually taken possession of the premises. It is claimed by the appellant that this matter has, in effect, been decided by a justice of this court, in a proceeding that was taken to punish the respondents for contempt of court in interfering with the possession of the appellant, who is an officer of this court. We cannot find any such decision. It is true that on one of the exhibits appears a memorandum in the handwriting of the late Mr. Justice Smyth, but that is not sufficient judgment or order of this court, and does not have the effect of either a judgment or order.

The final order is affirmed, with costs.