Legal Opinion

Staten Island National Bank & Trust Co. v. Buccello

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided June 30, 1955Published

1Per curiam

Defendant’s attorney obviously could not have personal knowledge of a negative, viz., that defendant had never received the T.V. set. His affidavit was therefore hearsay. Since no affidavit by defendant himself was submitted, no defense to the action was established, even prima facie. Furthermore, failure of consideration is not one of the defenses listed in section 94 of the Negotiable Instruments Law which shifts the burden to plaintiff, under section 98 of the Negotiable Instruments Law to show it is a holder in due course (see Schwartz v. Armand Fried, Inc., 189 Misc. 66, and cases there…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Karpas v. BandlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
  2. Schwartz v. Armand Fried Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API