Roldan v. Power
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo
Action by Miguel Camacho Roldan and another against Andrew F. Power and another. Plaintiffs demur to defendants’ counterclaims. Demurrer sustained.
1Opinion of the CourtGildersleeve, J.
The material allegations of the complaint are that the defendant Power made two promissory notes, dated February 1,1893, payable to his own order, one for $2,120, at 12 months, and the other for $2,160, at 16 months; that Power indorsed and delivered both notes to the defendant Thurber; that Thurber thereupon indorsed the notes, and that they came to the possession of plaintiff.
The answer sets up three counterclaims, to which plaintiffs demur chiefly on the grounds: First, that they are not sufficient in law; second, that they are not of the character specified in section 501 of the Code,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Bergmann v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Cragin v. . LovellNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Spofford v. . RowanNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Rice v. . GrangeNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Reiners v. BrandhorstNew York Supreme Court · 1879
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Fox v. MonahanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Blaut v. BlautNew York Supreme Court · 1903
- Ravold v. Fred Beers, Inc., New York County Courts1933
- Meyer v. ChamberlynCity of New York Municipal Court · 1900
- Fletcher v. MacGinnissAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.