Hirsh v. Van der Perren

New York Supreme Court

Hirsh v. Van der Perren

10 N.Y.S. 449, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 850, 57 Hun 587, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2163

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJune 6, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 N.Y.S. 449 (Hirsh v. Van der Perren) 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

Hirsh v. Van der Perren, 10 N.Y.S. 449, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 850, 57 Hun 587, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2163 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Brady, J.

The complaint alleges that the claim set up is for moneys received by the defendant as agent for the plaintiff in a fiduciary capacity, and the affidavits show that such allegation was properly made. The defendant requested the plaintiff’s agent, having possession of the same, to deliver to him a bill of lading, which was done upon the express.promise and agreement that he would, as the agent of the plaintiff, collect the money due from the vendees of the merchandise represented by it, and pay over the same to the plaintiff immediately. This appears from a statement of these facts on information and belief, but to which is added a declaration by the affiant that the defendant admitted it to be true. And further it appears by an affidavit of another deponent that the defendant admitted his collection of the money, and his personal appropriation of it. There are no arguments within the whole realm of ingenuity that can overwhelm these elements. They contain all that is necessary to justify an order of arrest, and need only be stated to make that proposition unquestionable. The order appealed from must therefore be affirmed, with $10 costs, and the disbursements of the appeal. All concur.

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

Brady, J.

The complaint alleges that the claim set up is for moneys received by the defendant as agent for the plaintiff in a fiduciary capacity, and the affidavits show that such allegation was properly made. The defendant requested the plaintiff’s agent, having possession of the same, to deliver to him a bill of lading, which was done upon the express.promise and agreement that he would, as the agent of the plaintiff, collect the money due from the vendees of the merchandise represented by it, and pay over the same to the plaintiff immediately. This appears from a statement of these facts on information and belief, but to which is added a declaration by the affiant that the defendant admitted it to be true. And further it appears by an affidavit of another deponent that the defendant admitted his collection of the money, and his personal appropriation of it. There are no arguments within the whole realm of ingenuity that can overwhelm these elements. They contain all that is necessary to justify an order of arrest, and need only be stated to make that proposition unquestionable. The order appealed from must therefore be affirmed, with $10 costs, and the disbursements of the appeal. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 N.Y.S. 449, 32 N.Y. St. Rep. 850, 57 Hun 587, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hirsh-v-van-der-perren-nysupct-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack