Goldman v. Abrahams
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from an order of the general term of the marine court of the city of New York, affirming a judgment of that court entered upon the verdict of a jury. This was an action upon a promissory note. The defense was a discharge in bankruptcy. The reply was that a new promise had been made.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the general term of the marine court of the city of New York, affirming a judgment of that court entered upon the verdict of a jury. This was an action upon a promissory note. The defense was a discharge in bankruptcy. The reply was that a new promise had been made. The evidence in respect to the new promise was as follows, the plaintiff being the witness: Q. What did Mr. Abrahams say in regard to the note subsequently at your house ? A. He promised to pay me. Q. What did he say ? A. He said that he would pay me, and that there would not be two cents paid less than the…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Brunt, J.
[After stating the facts as above.]—The ground upon which the appellant claims that the learned judge erred in his charge, is that the jury were substantially instructed that if they found from the evidence that the defendant had made any kind of a promise, conditional or otherwise, the plaintiff was entitled to recover. That such is the fair import of the language used seems to be apparent, and it is also equally true that such a proposition would be erroneous. If the promise was conditional, proof of the fulfillment of the condition must be given before a recovery can be had (Ingersoll v.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Davenport v. PrenticeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Bulson v. LearAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
- Lack v. WeberAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1908