Case Name: The Key West Building & Loan Association, Resp't, v. The Bank of Key West, App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-03-31
Citations: 45 N.Y. St. Rep. 152
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Key West Building & Loan Association, Resp’t, v. The Bank of Key West, App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 45
Pages: 152–152

Head Matter:
The Key West Building & Loan Association, Resp’t, v. The Bank of Key West, App’lt.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed March 31, 1892.)
Attachment—Persons acquiring title prior to levy.
A receiver or other person who has acquired title to property prior to-the levy of an attachment thereon has no standing in court to vacate the. attachment simply because under the attachment against another party his property has been seized. Section ,682 of the Code only permits such intervention in the case of a person who acquires title from the defendant subsequent to the levy.
Appeal from order denying motion to vacate attachment.
M. II. Cardozo, for app’lt; L. L. Kellogg, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Without at all passing upon the question as to» the validity of the attachment in the case at bar, in the disposition of this appeal it is sufficient to say that the title of the receiver to. the property taken under this attachment against the-bank having been acquired, if at all, prior to the issuing of the-attachment, he has no standing in court to vacate the attachment simply because under an attachment against the defendant they seized upon his property.
If the- title to the property had been acquired by the receiver subsequent to the attachment, then by § 682, of the Code he-would have had a right to intervene; but such not being the-fact, no such right exists, the right of strangers to intervene being by the section of the Code limited to cases where interest in the property attached has been acquired' from the defendant subsequent to its levy. No attachment against the defendant's property can affect in any way the right of the moving party here to» obtain possession of any property the title to which-had vested in him prior to the levy of the attachment.
The order appealed from should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Yan Brunt, P. J., O'Brien and Ingraham, JJ., concur.