Richardson v. Abendroth
43 Barb. 162, 1864 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 132
Opinions
I think this judgment should be affirmed. None of the transfers have the effect of relieving the plaintiff from his liability upon the demand in suit. Consequently, the cases of Bailey et al. v. Bancker, (3 Hill, 188,) and Andrews v. Murray, (33 Barb. 354,) are direct authorities against a recovery by the plaintiff, in this action.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Richardson v. Abendroth, 43 Barb. 162, 1864 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 132 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1864).
43 Barb. 162 (Richardson v. Abendroth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
May v. Genesee County Savings Bank
79 N.W. 630 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)
Dodge v. Havemeyer
4 N.Y. St. Rep. 561 (New York Supreme Court, 1886)
Branson v. Oregonian Railway Co.
11 Or. 161 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1883)
Clark v. Myers
18 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 608 (New York Supreme Court, 1877)
Deming v. Puleston
1 Jones & S. 231 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1871)
Williamson v. Wadsworth
49 Barb. 294 (New York Supreme Court, 1867)