Spence v. Baldwin

New York Supreme Court

Spence v. Baldwin

59 How. Pr. 375

DecidedJuly 15, 1880

StatusPublished

This text of 59 How. Pr. 375 (Spence v. Baldwin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Spence v. Baldwin, 59 How. Pr. 375 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Westbrook, J. —

I have no doubt of the soundness of the law stated by defendant’s counsel, but I think it has no appliication to this case.

The notes were accepted by reason of false statements made [377]*377by defendant, and plaintiff could repudiate the settlement for fraud. The notes must be surrendered, and such surrender must be a condition of upholding the order of arrest. The notes must be filed with the clerk to await the final order of the court in this action. If this is complied with the motion is denied.

Ho costs on motion as no tender of notes was made before suit.

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

Westbrook, J. —

I have no doubt of the soundness of the law stated by defendant’s counsel, but I think it has no appliication to this case.

The notes were accepted by reason of false statements made [377]*377by defendant, and plaintiff could repudiate the settlement for fraud. The notes must be surrendered, and such surrender must be a condition of upholding the order of arrest. The notes must be filed with the clerk to await the final order of the court in this action. If this is complied with the motion is denied.

Ho costs on motion as no tender of notes was made before suit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 How. Pr. 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spence-v-baldwin-nysupct-1880.