Kings County Trust Co. v. Giovinco

194 N.E. 60, 266 N.Y. 137, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 895
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 31, 1934·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The payment of interest in advance, in the circumstances as found by the trial court and sustained by the weight of evidence, rebuts the presumption (New York Life Ins. Co. v. Casey, 178 N. Y. 381) that such payment indicates an extension of time so as to discharge a surety.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed and that of the Special Term affirmed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division.

Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch and Loughran, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Kings County Trust Co. v. Giovinco, 194 N.E. 60, 266 N.Y. 137, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 895 (N.Y. 1934).

194 N.E. 60 (Kings County Trust Co. v. Giovinco) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Becker v. Faber
19 N.E.2d 997 (New York Court of Appeals, 1939)