Grossman v. Lindemann
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by the plaintiff from an order of the City Court of the city of ¡New York, setting asidg a verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff by direction of the court and ordering a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtLehman, J.
The plaintiff sued upon a promissory note for $2,000 on which he alleged that the sum of $1,240 had been paid. At the trial the note was introduced in evidence and showed on its face that the defendants deposited, as collateral security for the payment of the note, a full paid $2,000 insurance policy on the life of Philip Lindemann. The plaintiff testified that he had surrendered the policy and received therefor the sum of $1,240. Since the policy is an instrument for the payment of money, its deposit as collateral security, in the absence of a distinct provision permitting its sale, gave the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Parkhurst v. . BerdellNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Wheeler v. . NewbouldNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Toplitz v. . BauerNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Kelly v. . Security Mutual Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Griggs v. . DayNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- G-Fours, Inc. v. Charles A. Miele and Intersurance Systems CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Flatonia State Bank v. Southwestern Life InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1939
- Brown v. New York Life Ins. Co.District Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1938