Otis v. . Shants
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in'the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made December 30, 1889, which reversed an interlocutory judgment overruling a demurrer to defendant’s answer, sustained said demurrer, and directed judgment for plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in'the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made December 30, 1889, which reversed an interlocutory judgment overruling a demurrer to defendant’s answer, sustained said demurrer, and directed judgment for plaintiffs. This was an action upon two promissory notes given by defendant, for goods sold and delivered to him, to the trustees of the Mill River Button Company, who prior to such sales, had become trustees of said company under a liquidation agreement. Further facts are stated in the opinion. The demurrer does not…
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
The plaintiffs do not not sue to enforce any obligation under the “ agreement in liquidation.” The action is upon notes given for property purchased by the defendant of the trustees after they had assumed the trust. The first count in the answer alleges that the defendant was induced to become a party to the liquidation agreement by fraudulent representations made by the Mill River Button Company, its agents, officers and directors, and asks for judgment setting aside and canceling as to him the agreement. This answer was not a defense. The agreement was between the corporation, the creditors…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Quittner v. Los Angeles Steel Casting Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Doyle v. Fuerst & Kramer, Ltd.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1911
- Lignacraft, Inc. v. Automation Services, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971