Legal Opinion

Greenwood v. Schumacker

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 5, 1880PublishedCited by 1 opinion

This action was brought to recover back moneys alleged to have been paid by plaintiff and his assignor to defendant for certain forged bonds. The plaintiff claimed that in the purchase the firm of Kohler & Co. acted as agents of the vendees, the firm of Unger & Co. and one Hertog acting as agents for defendant.

Read the full summary

This action was brought to recover back moneys alleged to have been paid by plaintiff and his assignor to defendant for certain forged bonds. The plaintiff claimed that in the purchase the firm of Kohler & Co. acted as agents of the vendees, the firm of Unger & Co. and one Hertog acting as agents for defendant. The defense was that defendant was not the owner, but simply held the bonds as security for a loan, and that they were sold to plaintiff by Kohler & Co. as owners, acting on their own account, and not as agents. The principal proof relied upon by plaintiff to establish defendant’s…

1Opinion of the Court

Finch, J.,

reads for reversal.

All concur; éxcept Danforth, J., having been of counsel, taking no part.

Judgment reversed.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Marvin Safe Co. v. FossNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API