Jamaica National Bank v. Le Reiz Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jamaica National Bank v. Le Reiz Construction Corp.

283 A.D. 825, 128 N.Y.S.2d 809, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5436

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

DecidedMarch 29, 1954

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 A.D. 825 (Jamaica National Bank v. Le Reiz Construction Corp.) 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

Jamaica National Bank v. Le Reiz Construction Corp., 283 A.D. 825, 128 N.Y.S.2d 809, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5436 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action against the maker, an indorser, and a guarantor of a promissory note, judgment, insofar as it grants recovery in favor of the plaintiff against the indorser, reversed on the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The judgment appealed from is contrary to the weight of the evidence. There was testimony by the indorser, uncontradicted by witnesses who were apparently available, that, during the period he resided outside the State of New York, he had been frequently available within the State for service of process to plaintiff’s knowledge. In the circumstances, the proof of his nonresidence alone is insufficient to controvert his testimony as to his presence in the State, or to toll the Statute of Limitations. (Turner v. American Metal Go., 268 App. Div. 239, 267, appeal dismissed, 295 N. Y. 822.) Neither was there sufficient proof concerning the alleged payments on account to show whether, with respect to said statute, any of said payments preserved the obligation as against him. (Brooklyn Bank v. Barnaby, 197 N. Y. 210.) Nolan, P. J., MaeCrate, Schmidt, Beldoek and Murphy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action against the maker, an indorser, and a guarantor of a promissory note, judgment, insofar as it grants recovery in favor of the plaintiff against the indorser, reversed on the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The judgment appealed from is contrary to the weight of the evidence. There was testimony by the indorser, uncontradicted by witnesses who were apparently available, that, during the period he resided outside the State of New York, he had been frequently available within the State for service of process to plaintiff’s knowledge. In the circumstances, the proof of his nonresidence alone is insufficient to controvert his testimony as to his presence in the State, or to toll the Statute of Limitations. (Turner v. American Metal Go., 268 App. Div. 239, 267, appeal dismissed, 295 N. Y. 822.) Neither was there sufficient proof concerning the alleged payments on account to show whether, with respect to said statute, any of said payments preserved the obligation as against him. (Brooklyn Bank v. Barnaby, 197 N. Y. 210.) Nolan, P. J., MaeCrate, Schmidt, Beldoek and Murphy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 825, 128 N.Y.S.2d 809, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jamaica-national-bank-v-le-reiz-construction-corp-nyappdiv-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack