
    George F. Hodgman, Resp’t, v. Stephen T. Barker, Def’t.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, First Deparment,
    
    
      Filed October 16, 1891.)
    
    Attachment—Vacation—Subsequent attaching creditor.
    An appeal from an order denying motion by a subsequent attaching creditor to set aside the prior attachment will not be entertained where the attachment of the moving creditor has been set aside for insufficiency of the papers on which it was granted; a fact of which the appellate court may take judicial notice.
    Appeal by the national Broadway Bank, claiming to be a subsequent attaching creditor, from an order denying its motion to vacate an attachment previously granted to the plaintiff against the property of the defendant
    
      W. F. MacRac, for app’lt; E. K. Sackett, for resp’t.
   Van Brunt, P. J.

The disposition of the case of the national Broadway Bank v. The same defendant, seems to dispose of this appeal, notwithstanding the weakness of the papers upon which the plaintiff’s attachment was granted, the appellant cannot succeed upon this appeal, because of the fact, of which this court must take judicial notice, that .its attachment has been set aside upon motion of the defendant because of the insufficiency of the papers upon which it was granted, and is therefore no longer in a position to assert any claim to the property upon which the attachment in this action had been levied.

We think, therefore, that the appeal must be dismissed, but without costs.

Daniels and Ingraham, JJ., concur.  