Grimes v. Hillenbrand
New York Supreme Court
MOTION by defendant for a new trial upon exceptions taken at the circuit and ordered to be heard at the general term in the first instance, after a verdict in favor of plaintiff. The action was brought by William H. Grimes against Joseph Hillénbrand and another, upon a promissory note of $500 made by one of the defendants and indorsed by the other. The indorser alone defended.
Read the full summary
MOTION by defendant for a new trial upon exceptions taken at the circuit and ordered to be heard at the general term in the first instance, after a verdict in favor of plaintiff. The action was brought by William H. Grimes against Joseph Hillénbrand and another, upon a promissory note of $500 made by one of the defendants and indorsed by the other. The indorser alone defended. The defense was, that said note was executed to prevent opposition by a creditor of the maker to the discharge of the said maker in bankruptcy, and in fraud of the bankrupt law. Plaintiff was a bona fide holder of the…
1Opinion of the CourtE. Darwin Smith, J.
The verdict of the jury settles the question of fact that the plaintiff was a bona fide holder of the note in suit, and that he received it before maturity, and without notice of any of the circumstances which would have made it invalid in the hands of the original owner ; and also that said note was not given to induce Scheu, the original holder, to refrain from opposing the discharge of the maker in bankruptcy. The jury' were properly *621instructed that if the note was given and received for that purpose it was void, and their verdict should be for the defendant.
If the note was given, as the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Conderman v. HicksNew York Supreme Court · 1870