J. E. Carroll Sand Co. v. Earl C. Jones, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

J. E. Carroll Sand Co. v. Earl C. Jones, Inc.

175 N.E. 528, 256 N.Y. 99, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 1028

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 24, 1931

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 175 N.E. 528 (J. E. Carroll Sand Co. v. Earl C. Jones, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. E. Carroll Sand Co. v. Earl C. Jones, Inc., 175 N.E. 528, 256 N.Y. 99, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 1028 (N.Y. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

An assignment filed within ten days after the date when it was executed is valid under the provisions of section 16 of the Lien Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 33). The statute does not refer to the date which is inserted in the instrument of assignment but to the actual date when the assignment is made. The assignment to the State Bank of Bolivar was filed within the statutory period. *102 Nothing in the language of the instrument of assignment limited its effect. It was given as collateral security for advances to be made by the assignee and other banting institutions. To that extent and for that purpose, title to all moneys due and to become due passed to the assignee. Instruments thereafter executed by the assignee and delivered to the other banting institutions for the purpose of carrying out the purpose of the assignment and fixing the rights of the parties to the moneys previously assigned, do not constitute new assignments, within the meaning of the statute, which are void unless filed. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O’Brien and Hubbs, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

An assignment filed within ten days after the date when it was executed is valid under the provisions of section 16 of the Lien Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 33). The statute does not refer to the date which is inserted in the instrument of assignment but to the actual date when the assignment is made. The assignment to the State Bank of Bolivar was filed within the statutory period. *102 Nothing in the language of the instrument of assignment limited its effect. It was given as collateral security for advances to be made by the assignee and other banting institutions. To that extent and for that purpose, title to all moneys due and to become due passed to the assignee. Instruments thereafter executed by the assignee and delivered to the other banting institutions for the purpose of carrying out the purpose of the assignment and fixing the rights of the parties to the moneys previously assigned, do not constitute new assignments, within the meaning of the statute, which are void unless filed. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O’Brien and Hubbs, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 N.E. 528, 256 N.Y. 99, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 1028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-e-carroll-sand-co-v-earl-c-jones-inc-ny-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack