Legal Opinion

Ulster Finance Corp. v. Schroeder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 27, 1930PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Kirk, P. J.

The action is brought to recover on a promissory note. The appellants were accommodation indorsers. On a motion for summary judgment the court has struck out the answers of the appellants as sham. The defendants Elmendorf did not appear. Judgment was rendered against the appellants for the full amount. The note was given October 3, 1925, in accord with the terms of a conditional sales contract for the sale of a truck and as a part of *147said transaction. For a clear understanding of the issue between the parties the earlier history of this truck should be stated, particularly in respect to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Higgins v. . RidgwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
  2. Strong v. . SheffieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
  3. Miller v. CampbellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Maestro Music, Inc. v. Rudolph Wurlitzer CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Hartley v. HollmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Maestro Music, Inc. v. Rudolph Wurlitzer CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Maestro Music, Inc. v. Rudolph Wurlitzer CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API