Case Name: In re LANSLEY. Petition of LEWIS
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1925-06-01
Citations: 7 F.2d 888
Docket Number: No. 380
Parties: In re LANSLEY. Petition of LEWIS.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 7
Pages: 888–888

Head Matter:
In re LANSLEY. Petition of LEWIS.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 1, 1925.
No. 380.
Bernard Hershkopf and Saul S. Myers,, both of New York City, for petitioner.
Reynolds, Richards, McCuteheon & Logan, of New York City (Royal F. Shepard,, of New York City, of counsel), as amieuscuriee.
Before HOUGH, MANTON, and HAND,. Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the court-below that, since there was no property bathe custody of the court affected by the apparent legal title outstanding in. Smith,, service- of the show -cause order in New Jersey gave no jurisdiction to the court for the Eastern district of New York. Remington (3d Ed.) § 34, vol. 1, p. 64 et seq.
The proper practice would have been to-apply for ancillary summary process in the-New Jersey district. Babbitt v. Dutcher, 216 U. S. 102, 30 S. Ct. 372, 54 L. Ed. 402,. 17 Ann. Cas. 969.
Order affirmed.