Bogert v. Gulick
New York Supreme Court
This is an action on a promissory note for $395.81, dated Yew York, 8th July, 1869, at four months, to order of M. J. • O’Leary & Co., and indorsed by them, and Henry B. Ogden and Timothy Oohalen. The defendant’s name was signed to the note by her husband as her agent. The defendant then was and still is'a married woman, the wife of Egbert Gulick.
Read the full summary
This is an action on a promissory note for $395.81, dated Yew York, 8th July, 1869, at four months, to order of M. J. • O’Leary & Co., and indorsed by them, and Henry B. Ogden and Timothy Oohalen. The defendant’s name was signed to the note by her husband as her agent. The defendant then was and still is'a married woman, the wife of Egbert Gulick. The note was made and handed to Timothy Oohalen, to be by him delivered to the Travelers’ Insurance Co., in payment of the first annual premium, for an insurance policy on the life of Egbert Gulick, to be issued by said company to said Egbert…
1Opinion of the Court
Farohbe, J.—The
defendant did not, on the face of the note, charge in express terms her separate-estate. The case of Corn Exchange Insurance Company agt. Babcock (42 N. Y., 613) is not, therefore, authority against her defense. Had she made the note a charge on her separate estate, by its terms she might, perhaps, be estopped from asserting that it was not given for the benefit of her separate estate (Todd agt. Ames, 60 Barb., 462; Foster agt. Conger, 61 id., 147). The note itself bears no evidence that the defendant charged or. intended to charge her separate estate.
It is clear, upon the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Yale v. . DedererNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Corn Exchange Insurance v. BabcockNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Hansee v. De WittNew York Supreme Court · 1871
- Deck v. JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Foster v. CongerNew York Supreme Court · 1871