Zimmer v. Chew
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from trial term, New York county. Action by Louis L. Zimmer against William H. Chew and another, impleaded with others. From a judgment dismissing his complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed as to legal representatives of defendant George Hagemeyer, and reversed as to other defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from trial term, New York county. Action by Louis L. Zimmer against William H. Chew and another, impleaded with others. From a judgment dismissing his complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed as to legal representatives of defendant George Hagemeyer, and reversed as to other defendants. The action is upon a promissory note for $9,400, dated August 9, 1894, payable in six months, made by Ohew & Eadie, to the order of Hugh Dalzell, Jr. The indorsements are as follows: “Geo. Hagemeyer & Sons. “Foreign Hardwood Log Co., “By G. B. Hanford, Treas., “By Nathaniel Haven. Vice Pres’t.” “Rec’d of…
1Opinion of the CourtBarrett, J.
The three grounds of the motion to dismiss raise the legal questions to be considered.
1. The indorsement of the note in blank by the payee, Dalzell, and the production of it by the plaintiff, constituted prima facie evidence of the latter’s ownership. Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d Ed.) p. 318, and cases cited. The mere fact of subsequent indorsements does not affect this result. Presumably, the prior holder, the plaintiff, took up the note. That view is strengthened here by the cancellation of the later indorsements. To rebut this presumption of ownership, the defendants rely mainly upon the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Columbus Watch Co. v. HodenpylNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Montgomery v. SchenckNew York Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by1 opinion
- Marks v. MunsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1915