Hedstbom v. Kahn

123 Misc. 535

This text of 123 Misc. 535 (Hedstbom v. Kahn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hedstbom v. Kahn, 123 Misc. 535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence convincingly establishes that the note in suit was given to induce plaintiff to sign the composition agreement which he had theretofore refused to sign, and that the intent and purpose of the giving of the note was to collusively give plaintiff a benefit over other creditors who, with him, signed the composition agreement. The note was, therefore, in its inception fraudulent and void. See White v. Kuntz, 107 N. Y. 518, 525.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and complaint dismissed on the merits, with costs.

All concur; present, Guy, Gavegan and Mitchell, JJ.

Judgment reversed and complaint dismissed.

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

Related

White v. . Kuntz
14 N.E. 423 (New York Court of Appeals, 1887)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
123 Misc. 535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hedstbom-v-kahn-nyappterm-1924.