Feinberg v. Mullin

249 A.D. 670, 291 N.Y.S. 302, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5463
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 11, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 249 A.D. 670 (Feinberg v. Mullin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Feinberg v. Mullin, 249 A.D. 670, 291 N.Y.S. 302, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5463 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

Appeal from order and summary judgment in an action on a promissory note. Plaintiff is the payee in the note. She says that the note was given her to pay an account which defendant originally owed to her husband, which has been assigned to her. The defendant’s affidavit filed in opposition to the motion for summary judgment [671]*671disputes the items of the account and pleads lack of consideration for the note. As between the original parties to the note, such a defense is proper. (Neg. Inst. Law, § 54; Strong v. Sheffield, 144 N. Y. 392, 394; Miller v. Campbell, 173 App. Div. 821; Ulster Finance Corporation v. Schroeder, 230 id. 146.) Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts, with costs, and new trial granted. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, Crapser, Bliss and Heffeman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pash v. Wagner
2 Misc. 2d 822 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 A.D. 670, 291 N.Y.S. 302, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feinberg-v-mullin-nyappdiv-1936.