Middlesex County Bank v. Hirsch Bros. Veneer Manufacturing Co.
This text of 4 N.Y.S. 385 (Middlesex County Bank v. Hirsch Bros. Veneer Manufacturing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The defendant, a corporation, is sought to be charged as indorser of two promissory notes held by the plaintiff. The indorsements were made in the name of the defendant, by “L. Hirsch, Manager. ” There is no proof in the case that the notes concerned any business of the corporation ; that it ever received any value for or benefit from the indorsement; or that Mr. Hirsch, the manager, had power to bind it in the form stated. On the contrary, it would rather seem that - the corporation received no benefit from the transaction, and that it did not concern the corporation business,— a circumstance negativing the existence of authority in Hirsch, even as manager, to bind the corporation as indorser on negotiable paper in which it had no interest or concern. There must be a new trial of the action, at which the plaintiff may perhaps supply the required proof. See Mor. Priv. Corp. § 423; Bank v. Bank, 13 N. Y. 309; Insurance Co. v. Insurance Co., 7 Wend. 31; Alexander v. Cauldwell, 83 N. Y. 480. Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 N.Y.S. 385, 24 N.Y. St. Rep. 297, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/middlesex-county-bank-v-hirsch-bros-veneer-manufacturing-co-nynyccityct-1889.