Chase v. Deering
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, James A. Deering, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Kings County Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 24th day of February, 1905, denying the said defendant’s motion to strike out certain portions of the complaint:
1Opinion of the Court
Willard Bartlett, J.:
It is no longer open to question in this State that the assignee of part of a claim may maintain an action to recover the portion which has been assigned to him. (Risley v. Phenix Bank of City of New York, 83 N. Y. 318; Lauer v. Dunn, 52 Hun, 191; affd., 115 N. Y. 405; Chambers v. Lancaster, 3 App. Div. 215; affd., 160 N. Y. 342.) The cases cited were all actions at law. In Chambers v. Lancaster (supra) the record (which is on the files of this court, as the case went up from this, department, and of the State Law Library at Albany [N. Y. Ct. App. Cas. & Br. Counsel, Vol.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Risley v. . Phenix Bank of City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Lauer v. . DunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Chambers v. . LancasterNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Chambers v. LancasterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dickinson v. TysenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Byrne v. RinaldoCity of New York Municipal Court · 1931
- Carvill v. Mirror Films, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917