Ayres v. Leypoldt
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the general term of the Marine Court of the city of New York, reversing a judgment of that court (dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint), entered on the report of a referee, and ordering judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant for $365 24. The action was brought against the defendant on his promissory note for $239 52, dated May 25th, 1874, and payable four months after date to the order of Waldron & Payne.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the general term of the Marine Court of the city of New York, reversing a judgment of that court (dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint), entered on the report of a referee, and ordering judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendant for $365 24. The action was brought against the defendant on his promissory note for $239 52, dated May 25th, 1874, and payable four months after date to the order of Waldron & Payne. The defense was that the note had been made by the defendant solely for the accommodation of Waldron & Payne, under an agreement with…
1Opinion of the Court
Chábles P. Daly, Chief Justice.
In this case, the note in suit was diverted from the purpose for which it was made, and was received by the plaintiff in part payment for goods sold. The case, therefore, presents the same question which we have passed upon in McAdam v. Cooke, decided at the present term (ante, p. 101). The plaintiff, upon the authority of Weaver v. Bardon (49 N. Y. 236), and Turner v. Tredway (53 Id. 650), was not a bona fide holder of the note before maturity for value. The precedent debt, which it was taken in part payment of, was not evidenced by any writing or written…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bell v. . DixNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
3Cited by1 opinion
- Treadwell v. LincolnNew York Supreme Court · 1889