Case ID: nys_40/html/1145-07.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MANN, Appellant, v. DOHT, Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    May 1, 1896.)
    Action by Samuel Mann against Henry Doht, as sheriff, etc.
    J. Barnett, for appellant.
    A. H. Parkhurst, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We think this order must be reversed. The action was brought to recover possession of personal property. The subject-matter of the action was the possession of the property. In that the moving party had no interest. No judgment in this action could affect his light to possession or his title to. the property. Section 452 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply, because the moving party had no interest in the subject-matter of the action. Rosenberg v. Salomon, 144 N. Y. 92, 38 N. E. 982, is not controlling, for in that case the moving party had a direct interest in the action, in that, if the defendant succeeded, the property would go in payment of his debt, but if the plaintiff succeeded, it would not. The order ■should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs.