Legal Opinion

Ruck v. Levine

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided January 22, 1930PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The defense of failure of consideration is not one of those specified in section-94 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, as rendering title to the instrument defective and, therefore, it did not cause a shifting upon plaintiff of the burden of proving he was a holder in due course. (See Neg. Inst. Law, § 98.) The burden was on the defendant to establish that plaintiff was not a holder in due course. As he failed to meet this burden the judgment is reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event. Appeal from order dismissed.

All concur; present, Lydon,…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Levitt v. Johnstown Office Supply Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  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