Case Name: Matter of the petition of Silas Ingraham
Court: New York Court of Chancery
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1846-10-06
Citations: 2 Barb. Ch. 35
Docket Number: 
Parties: Matter of the petition of Silas Ingraham.
Judges: 
Reporter: Barbour's Chancery Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 35–36

Head Matter:
Matter of the petition of Silas Ingraham.
The court of chancery has no jurisdiction, upon the petition of a stranger to a smiia • • that court, to order a demand which he has against a firm in which the defendants m such suit are partners, to be paid to him, out of funds in the hands of the receiver in the suit.
The remedy of a person having an equitable claim to funds thus situate*! is to file a bill, making the complainants in such suit, and the several members of the firm, defendants, after having exhausted his remedy at law, against his debtors by judgment and execution.
This was an application by S. Ingraham, ¿? siiarger to the suit brought in this court by H. G„ HhiJonas In-graham and Daniel Bolles, to have a demand which he had against a firm in which the defendants were partners, paid to him out of their funds, in the hands of the receiver.
J. Wilkinson, for the petitioner.
N. K. Hall, for H. G. Harrison.

Opinion:
The Chancellor.
There is nothing in the petition which gives to this court any jurisdiction, or authority to interfere.m tbi; summary way, even if the petitioner has a preferable claim on the funds in question. Jf he has any equitable claim to payment out of any funds which belonged to either of the firms, and which claims are affected by the decree in this suit, which is doubtful, at least, upon the facts stated in Ids petition, his proper course is to file a bill, in his own name, making Harrison, and the several members of the firm, defendants in such suit. I am inclined to think, however, that he is not in a situation to file such a bill until he has exhausted his remedy at law, against his debtors, by judgment alid execution.
Application denied, with costs.