Cram v. Union Bank
New York Court of Appeals
Ambrose Cram sued the Union Bank of Rochester, in the supreme court, for the balance of a deposit, which he claimed as assignee of the firm of Whaples & Roach. The title of Whaples & Roach to this balance depended on the copartnership agreement between Whaples & Roach, and a previous purchase by Whaples of an interest in the assets of a former firm.
Read the full summary
Ambrose Cram sued the Union Bank of Rochester, in the supreme court, for the balance of a deposit, which he claimed as assignee of the firm of Whaples & Roach. The title of Whaples & Roach to this balance depended on the copartnership agreement between Whaples & Roach, and a previous purchase by Whaples of an interest in the assets of a former firm. The facts shown on the trial were that the former firm of Roach & Mattison, mechanics, in Rochester, had a deposit in the defendant’s bank on which there was a balance due them of about one hundred and sixty-five dollars. Mattison, by a bill of…
1Opinion of the Court
Hunt, Ch. J.
The first question that arises upon the motion for the nonsuit is, whether the transfer from Mattison to Whaples covered the demand in question.
The transfer conveyed the one undivided half of all the property or valuable things of the firm of Eoach and Mattison, of every name and kind. By the same instrument Whaples undertook to pay the one-half of all the debts of the said firm. An inventory was made, which, it was supposed, contained a statement in substance, both of the assets, and the debts, of the firm. There was, however, no covenant or restriction which limited the effect…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Marsh v. . McNairNew York Court of Appeals · 1885