Victer v. Fagin

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Victer v. Fagin

145 N.Y.S. 47

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 30, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 145 N.Y.S. 47 (Victer v. Fagin) 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.

Bluebook

Victer v. Fagin, 145 N.Y.S. 47 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff and defendant had been copartners and dissolved that relationship. As an incident to the dissolution, defendant transferred, by an instrument in writing, to the plaintiff a number of outstanding accounts with an agreement or warranty that no part of their face value had been collected. Subsequent to such assignment, defendant accepted and deposited a check of $50 from one of the firm’s debtors on account of one of the assigned debts. The defendant seems to claim that this check had been given a month before the assignment and had been postdated. Plaintiff apparently urges that that testimony is in derogation of a written instrument. Both points are immaterial, as it is perfectly evident that defendant has collected money due to the plaintiff and that plaintiff is entitled to recover, the same from him.

Judgment reversed, and new-trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff and defendant had been copartners and dissolved that relationship. As an incident to the dissolution, defendant transferred, by an instrument in writing, to the plaintiff a number of outstanding accounts with an agreement or warranty that no part of their face value had been collected. Subsequent to such assignment, defendant accepted and deposited a check of $50 from one of the firm’s debtors on account of one of the assigned debts. The defendant seems to claim that this check had been given a month before the assignment and had been postdated. Plaintiff apparently urges that that testimony is in derogation of a written instrument. Both points are immaterial, as it is perfectly evident that defendant has collected money due to the plaintiff and that plaintiff is entitled to recover, the same from him.

Judgment reversed, and new-trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 N.Y.S. 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/victer-v-fagin-nyappterm-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack