Reif v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States
New York Court of Appeals
The facts and circumstances which would have been disclosed by reasonable inquiry at the times of receipt of the checks would have dispelled any presumption that there had been an unauthorized use of the funds of the corporation. (Martindale v. De Kay, 101 Mise. Rep. 728; 180 App. Div. 926; 224 N. Y. 585; Kepner Co. v. Hutton, 179 App. Div. 130; 226 N. Y. 674; Heig v. Caspary, 191 App.
Read the full summary
The facts and circumstances which would have been disclosed by reasonable inquiry at the times of receipt of the checks would have dispelled any presumption that there had been an unauthorized use of the funds of the corporation. (Martindale v. De Kay, 101 Mise. Rep. 728; 180 App. Div. 926; 224 N. Y. 585; Kepner Co. v. Hutton, 179 App. Div. 130; 226 N. Y. 674; Heig v. Caspary, 191 App. Div. 560.) As reasonable inquiry by the defendant would not have disclosed for the first time to the corporation the practices of its president and prevented their continuance, the defendant should not be held…
1Opinion of the CourtLoughran, J.
Abraham Hart, as president of Shon-good, Hart Company, Inc., drew in its name twenty-two checks to the order of the defendant insurance company and transmitted them in payment of premiums upon policies of issued by defendant upon the life of Hart for the benefit of his wife. These checks were collected by defendant without inquiry respecting the powers of Hart as an officer of Shongood, Hart Company, Inc. That corporation thereafter became a bankrupt and plaintiff, as its trustee in bankruptcy, has recovered a judgment against defendant as a convertor of the moneys it so received within six…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wood v. DummerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1824
- Ward v. City Trust Co. of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Whiting v. . Hudson Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Rochester & Charlotte Turnpike Road Co. v. PaviourNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Second National Bank of Elmira v. WestonNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Barr & Creelman Mill & Plumbing Supply Co. v. ZollerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Field v. LewDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1960
- Union Oil Co. of Calif. v. LullOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Medlinsky v. Premium Cut Beef Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- Lake Park Development Co. v. Paul Steenberg Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.