Ruck v. Levine
This text of 135 Misc. 546 (Ruck v. Levine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court 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 defense of failure of consideration is not one of those specified in section-94 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, as rendering title to the instrument defective and, therefore, it did not cause a shifting upon plaintiff of the burden of proving he was a holder in due course. (See Neg. Inst. Law, § 98.) The burden was on the defendant to establish that plaintiff was not a holder in due course. As he failed to meet this burden the judgment is reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event. Appeal from order dismissed.
All concur; present, Lydon, Peters and Frankenthaler, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 Misc. 546, 239 N.Y.S. 437, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruck-v-levine-nyappterm-1930.