The Superior Court of New York City February 7, 1881 (Murtha v. Curley)

Also known as

United States · · · 07-02-1881

Per Curiam.

It does not appear that the action were tried as if it were on a creditors bill to set aside the chattel mortgage. If it had been, the appropriate judgment would have been that the defendants account for the property mortgaged, or its proceeds. The appellant would not, in any event, have been liable for any greater sum, than the value of the property, or the proceeds obtained by him.

Read the full text

This document is published by courtlistener.com.

Moonlit adds the citation network, article-level links and cross-references, which are available to search for free.