Argall v. . Jacobs
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of' the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made Hay 21, 1880, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. (Reported below, 21 Htm, 114.) The nature of the action and the material facts appear in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of' the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made Hay 21, 1880, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. (Reported below, 21 Htm, 114.) The nature of the action and the material facts appear in the opinion. The suit being upon the notes, without any disclosure of any right of action for goods sold or claim of a fraud being perpetrated, no evidence of fraud was admissible. (Old Code, § 14; Hilsen v. Sibley, 12 J. & S. 12.) In the present case the plaintiff could not avoid the complete…
1Opinion of the CourtEarl, J.
This action was brought upon two promissory notes given by the defendants to the plaintiff for .goods sold. They, in their answers, admit the making and delivery of the notes, and set up, as an affirmative defense, a compo sition and discharge thereby in bankruptcy subsequent to the date of the notes.
Upon the trial, the plaintiff, to avoid the effect of the bankruptcy discharge, gave evidence, under objection and exception, tending to show that his debt was. created by the fraud of the bankrupts, and the trial judge charged the jury that if they found that the debt was so created the…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Levin v. SingerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961
- Gregory v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1920
- Frey v. TorreyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. GolomboskySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1946
- Burleson v. LangdonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.