Strickland v. Henry
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, William Henry, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 19tli day of March, 1901, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office. on the 18th day of March; 1901, denying* the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.
1Opinion of the Court
Sewell, J.:
This action was brought to recover on .an accommodation note made' by the defendant to the order of Tony Rheims and transferred by him before maturity to the plaintiff at a discount which made the interest reserved forty per cent per annum. The note did not represent a legal transaction. It had no legal existence when sold to the plaintiff, and having no legal existence,'could not be the subject of sale and purchase. (Eastman v. Shaw, 65 N. Y. 522, arid cases cited.) In point of law the sale of accommodation paper is merely a loan of money, the purchaser being the lender and the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Vosburgh v. . DiefendorfNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Eastman v. . ShawNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Claflin v. . BoorumNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
3Cited by9 opinions
- Moody v. Morris-Roberts Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923
- Sabine v. PaineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- Midtown Commercial Corp. v. KelnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968
- Bruck v. LambeckCity of New York Municipal Court · 1909
- Oppikofer v. MurphyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.