Hepburn v. . Montgomery
New York Court of Appeals
These actions were brought by plaintiff, as receiver of the Continental Life Insurance Company. Actions numbers one and two were to foreclose mortgages, executed by defendant. In these he interposed as a counter-claim an alleged indebtedness of the company to him as its agent for commissions in pursuance of an agreement with the company.
Read the full summary
These actions were brought by plaintiff, as receiver of the Continental Life Insurance Company. Actions numbers one and two were to foreclose mortgages, executed by defendant. In these he interposed as a counter-claim an alleged indebtedness of the company to him as its agent for commissions in pursuance of an agreement with the company. As to this the court says: “We are of opinion that the counter-claims in actions numbers one and two fall within the principle of the cases of People v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance Go. (91 N. Y. 174) and Attorney-General v. Continental Life Insu/ra/nce Co.,…
1Opinion of the Court
Rapallo, J.,
reads for reversal and new trial in actions numbers one and two, and for affirmance in number three.
All concur.
Judgments accordingly.
2Cited by6 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Palmer v. Peoria Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1941
- In re Falls' EstateNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- O'Hern v. DeLongAppellate Court of Illinois · 1939
- People ex rel. Palmer v. Peoria Life InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1940
- Rollins v. Co-operative Building BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.