Legal Opinion

Stutson v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided February 10, 1939Published

1Per curiam

The finding of the Virginia court that Louis H. Stutson was a fraudulent assignee may be availed of as a defense by the defendant. A recovery against the principal in an action to which the surety is not a party is not conclusive upon the surety where the covenant is one of general indemnity merely against claims or suits. It was error, therefore, to strike out the first and second defenses. (Adams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 239 App. Div. 525; affd., 264 N. Y. 550; Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. 9th Avenue-31st St. Corp., 274 id. 388.)

Order modified by reinstating the first and second…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Adams v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
  2. Adams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API