Port Huron Engine & Thresher Co. v. Baldwin Contracting Co.

Majority

p. 616

Port Huron Engine and Thresher Company, Appellant, v. Baldwin Contracting Company et al., Respondents.

Headnote

Port Huron Engine & Thresher Co. v. Baldwin Contracting Co., 152 App. Div. 903 , affirmed.

(Argued February 12, 1914;

decided March 10, 1914.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered August 6, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict in an action to recover upon certain promissory notes.

Thomas E. Lawrence and Charles J. Staples for appellant.

Joseph B. Murphy, Charles A. Hitchcock and Clark H. Timmerman for respondents.

The jury had a right, under the evidence, to find that the Acme Company indorsed the notes solely for the purpose of transferring title thereto to the plaintiff and for its accommodation. The giving of the notes by the Baldwin Company did not prevent it from asserting and proving its counterclaim, and the question of pleading was not sufficiently raised to prevent its counterclaim being considered.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to each defendant.

Concur: Willard Bartlett, Oh. J., Hiscocit, Chare, Cuddeback, Hogan, Miller and Cardozo, JJ.