Bronson v. Tuthill
New York Court of Appeals
Amos Bronson, as receiver of the Western Insurance Company, sued Daniel M. Tuthill and another, in the supreme court, on a premium note made by-defendants; on insuring in the Western (Mutual) Ins. Co. One of the defenses set up was fraud on the part of the insurance company, in inducing defendants to make the note; to rebut which, plaintiff on the trial attempted to show that the authority of Gordon (the agent, who took the note), was limited, and was in writing.
Read the full summary
Amos Bronson, as receiver of the Western Insurance Company, sued Daniel M. Tuthill and another, in the supreme court, on a premium note made by-defendants; on insuring in the Western (Mutual) Ins. Co. One of the defenses set up was fraud on the part of the insurance company, in inducing defendants to make the note; to rebut which, plaintiff on the trial attempted to show that the authority of Gordon (the agent, who took the note), was limited, and was in writing. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. Plaintiff had judgment, which was affirmed by the court at general term, which held…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Peckham, J.
The precise facts in the case are not stated, except in connection with the objections urged by the appellants. It is insisted that the motion for a nonsuit should have been granted, because there was no proof of a proper notice of the assessment upon the note, no proof of publication thereof in a newspaper the proper time before the same should be payable, according to the by-laws, &c.
There was substantial proof of the proper publication, but the defendants made no objection, beforé the referee, to the sufficiency of the notice, and cannot therefore urge it here. It…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Rosenbaum v. PodolskyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1916