Dunn v. . Hornbeck
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and affirming an order denying a motion for a new trial. (Reported below, 7 flun, 629.) The nature of the action and the facts are set forth sufficiently in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and affirming an order denying a motion for a new trial. (Reported below, 7 flun, 629.) The nature of the action and the facts are set forth sufficiently in the opinion. The admission of evidence, after it appeared that the note was given for land conveyed to defendant by plaintiff, showing, or tending to show, that plaintiff’s husband furnished the money originally invested, was error. (Schoonmaker v. De Witt, 17 J. R., 304;…
1Opinion of the CourtFolger, J.
This is an action upon a promissory note made by the defendant, by its terms payable to the order of the plaintiff, and not indorsed over by her. On the trial it was produced by her counsel. This made hi the plaintiff a prima facie right of action.
The defense is set up that the plaintiff is not the real owner of the note, but that her husband John is. Another defense is, that the payment of the note had been made by the defendant to John, that he was then the owner and possessor of the note, or the agent of the plaintiff' to receive the payment.
The first defense and the first branch of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Logan v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Harrison National Bank v. AustinNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
- Doyle v. CoreyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Phelan v. BradyNew York Supreme Court · 1887
- Hobbs v. City of YonkersNew York Supreme Court · 1884