Harvey v. Ayres

37 Misc. 164, 74 N.Y.S. 883
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1902·Published

Opinion

Gaynob, J.:

I regret that the learned counsel for the defendant has neglected to furnish a brief as he was requested to do, but has left the court without the aid of any research as on the trial. There was no consideration for the contract of endorsement. The plaintiff was under legal obligation to deliver the deed of conveyance on the tender of the two notes as made by the purchaser. The performance of that obligation could not constitute a consideration for the new contract, i. e., the defendant’s contract of endorsement (Arend v. Smith, 151 N. Y. 502).

The verdict is set aside and a verdict directed for the defendant.

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

Harvey v. Ayres, 37 Misc. 164, 74 N.Y.S. 883 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1902).

37 Misc. 164 (Harvey v. Ayres) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Arend v. . Smith
45 N.E. 872 (New York Court of Appeals, 1897)