Rogers v. Duffield
This text of 186 A.D. 965 (Rogers v. Duffield) 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.
Opinion
The ratification of the notes found to have taken place after the infant defendant reached his majority not only gave a validity to his notes, but ratified his liability for the original merchandise purchased. (Henry v. Root, 33 N. Y. 526.) The dates of such notes fixed the date for the Statute of Limitations. (Smith v. Ryan, 66 N. Y. 352.) The liability of the surety was submitted to the jury as a question of fact, under explicit instructions that such surety was released, if the notes were executed without his knowledge. Hence no question of the liability of either defendant survives the verdict. The judgment and order are, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Kelly, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
186 A.D. 965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-duffield-nyappdiv-1918.