Case Name: Simon M. Bondy et al. Respondents, v. Abraham Collier, Impleaded, Appellant
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-02
Citations: 11 Misc. 443
Docket Number: 
Parties: Simon M. Bondy et al. Respondents, v. Abraham Collier, Impleaded, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 11
Pages: 443–444

Head Matter:
Simon M. Bondy et al. Respondents, v. Abraham Collier, Impleaded, Appellant.
(City Court of New York — General Term,
February, 1895.)
Where the proper undertaking on an order of arrest was filed, but is defective, the court has power to allow a new undertaking to be executed and filed.
Appeal by defendant Oollier from order-denying motion to vacate order of arrest.
Davis dt Kaufmam,, for appellant.
Blumenstiel dc Hwsoh, for respondents.

Opinion:
Ehrlich, Ch. J.
Tlie court- below directed, that the motion to vacate the-order of arrest- be granted unless the plaintiffs executed and filed a new undertaking as provided by the Code.
The proper undertaking having been filed, and the court having power to allow the defects in the original undertaking to be amended (Code, §; 730 ; Bellinger v. Gardner, 2 Abb. Pr. 441; Irwin v. Judd, 20 Hun, 562; Beach v. Southworth, 6 Barb. 173 ; Kissam v. Marshall, 10 Abb. Pr. 424; Marvin v. Marvin, 11 Abb. [N. S.] 97), the case on appeal stands practically as if the original undertaking- had been perfect in the first instance.
The affidavit on which the order of arrest was granted sets forth a-: good cause of action for goods sold, to the defendants on the- faith of representations which afterwards proved-to be untrue. The affidavit sufficiently establishes the. fraud and. the sources of' knowledge and information clearly appear therein.
It- follows that-the order appealed from must: be affirmed, with costs.
Fitzsimons and Newburger, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed, with costs.