Kelley v. Sprague

New York Supreme Court

Kelley v. Sprague

13 N.Y.S. 64, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 445, 58 Hun 611, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2733

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 31, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 N.Y.S. 64 (Kelley v. Sprague) 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

Kelley v. Sprague, 13 N.Y.S. 64, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 445, 58 Hun 611, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2733 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The question here is substantially one of fact. The findings of the learned referee are fully supported by the evidence, and his legal conclusions properly follow therefrom. We have no doubt, upon the evidence, that the transaction between Sprague and Yale, which is here questioned, was a fair one under the circumstances. Yale took the lease and property which were assigned to him in good faith, and for value. He was entirely innocent of any fraudulent purpose of Sprague’s. The same was true of the transfer to the hotel company. The learned referee, in addition to his report, has given his reasons therefor in a careful opinion which covers the main questions discussed before us. We are satisfied with this opinion, and need add nothing further thereto. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The question here is substantially one of fact. The findings of the learned referee are fully supported by the evidence, and his legal conclusions properly follow therefrom. We have no doubt, upon the evidence, that the transaction between Sprague and Yale, which is here questioned, was a fair one under the circumstances. Yale took the lease and property which were assigned to him in good faith, and for value. He was entirely innocent of any fraudulent purpose of Sprague’s. The same was true of the transfer to the hotel company. The learned referee, in addition to his report, has given his reasons therefor in a careful opinion which covers the main questions discussed before us. We are satisfied with this opinion, and need add nothing further thereto. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.Y.S. 64, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 445, 58 Hun 611, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelley-v-sprague-nysupct-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack