In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of People's Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of People's Trust Co.

166 A.D. 888, 151 N.Y.S. 1139

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 15, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 166 A.D. 888 (In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of People's Trust Co.) 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

In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of People's Trust Co., 166 A.D. 888, 151 N.Y.S. 1139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The evidence shows with requisite clearness that Roberts, fully competent to do so, executed the paper at its date, whereby the shares of stock were transferred to Hice upon a condition since performed. The instrument itself, bearing the genuine signature of Roberts, speaks strongly for its own validity, while the testimony of Barnes, McNeil and Baker forcefully confirms it. The statements of other witnesses and, above all, the recital in the instrument of a note not then existing, which either then or later was drawn in a different form—the form in which Roberts and Hice desired it to be, and which was not changed to coincide with the recital earlier than January eighteenth, as shown by Hice’s letter of that date and of the day following, bring to our attention matters of grave import, and have been studied and weighed. But the explanation by Hice in association with the transfer itself, and the supporting evidence of men whose testimony indicates fairness and moderation, leave the case free from the doubt that would require a rejection of the claim. The decree of the surrogate should be reversed, without costs, and judgment entered for theclaimant, in accordance with the findings as amended in this court. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred. Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings county reversed, without costs, and judgment entered for the claimant, in accordance with the findings as amended in this court. The seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth findings of fact, and third conclusion of law, are reversed. Findings of fact proposed by George S. Hice Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14,19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 32, and conclusions of law Nos. 1 and 2 are found.

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

Per Curiam:

The evidence shows with requisite clearness that Roberts, fully competent to do so, executed the paper at its date, whereby the shares of stock were transferred to Hice upon a condition since performed. The instrument itself, bearing the genuine signature of Roberts, speaks strongly for its own validity, while the testimony of Barnes, McNeil and Baker forcefully confirms it. The statements of other witnesses and, above all, the recital in the instrument of a note not then existing, which either then or later was drawn in a different form—the form in which Roberts and Hice desired it to be, and which was not changed to coincide with the recital earlier than January eighteenth, as shown by Hice’s letter of that date and of the day following, bring to our attention matters of grave import, and have been studied and weighed. But the explanation by Hice in association with the transfer itself, and the supporting evidence of men whose testimony indicates fairness and moderation, leave the case free from the doubt that would require a rejection of the claim. The decree of the surrogate should be reversed, without costs, and judgment entered for theclaimant, in accordance with the findings as amended in this court. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred. Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings county reversed, without costs, and judgment entered for the claimant, in accordance with the findings as amended in this court. The seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth findings of fact, and third conclusion of law, are reversed. Findings of fact proposed by George S. Hice Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14,19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 32, and conclusions of law Nos. 1 and 2 are found.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 A.D. 888, 151 N.Y.S. 1139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-final-judicial-settlement-of-the-account-of-peoples-trust-co-nyappdiv-1914.