Dale v. Jacobs

10 Abb. Pr. 382, 41 How. Pr. 94
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1871
StatusPublished

This text of 10 Abb. Pr. 382 (Dale v. Jacobs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dale v. Jacobs, 10 Abb. Pr. 382, 41 How. Pr. 94 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1871).

Opinion

Cabdozo, J.

I do not think there is any difficulty as to this case. The goods were sold upon a short credit of thirty days, at the end of which defendants claim to be insolvent, but decline to furnish any explanation of their affairs.

Becoming insolvent so soon after the sale, it is not too much, there being no explanation offered, to believe that they were so when they made the purchases, and, if that be so, they fraudulently concealed the fact, intending, when they bought the goods, not to pay for them. That was “a fraudulent contracting of the debt (Nichols v. Michael, 23 N. Y., 264). I cannot say that the affidavits do not disclose such fact, and the conduct of the defendants has not been such as to justify a jury in finding that the debt was not so contracted.

Motion in both cases denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Nichols v. . Michael
23 N.Y. 264 (New York Court of Appeals, 1861)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Abb. Pr. 382, 41 How. Pr. 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dale-v-jacobs-nysupct-1871.