Acer v. . Hotchkiss
New York Court of Appeals
The appeal in the action first entitled is from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made the second Tuesday of June, .1882, which affirmed a judgment entered, upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Read the full summary
The appeal in the action first entitled is from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made the second Tuesday of June, .1882, which affirmed a judgment entered, upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The appeal in the action second above entitled is from a judgment of said General Term, entered upon an order madé at the time above stated, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a decision of the trial court, and directed judgment for defendant. The action first entitled was brought to…
1Opinion
The opinion in the action second above entitled is as follows: The matters stated in the answer did not constitute a defense. The General Term gave them that force and effect upon grounds against which we have decided in the foreclosure suit brought by Acer. We there held that the covenant of Hotchkiss was to pay and discharge the Acer mortgage, and not merely to carry the debt till the Baker and Wooster mortgage became due. We further held that the covenant of Hotchkiss was independent, and payment of their mortgage by Baker and Wooster was not a condition precedent to their right of action…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gay v. GayNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. CuylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Coffin v. . McLeanNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Van Brunt v. . DayNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Northrup v. NorthrupNew York Supreme Court · 1826