Kobre Assets Corp. v. Baker

Headnote

Kobre Assets Corpn. v. Baker, 178 App. Div. 62 , affirmed.

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 20, 1917, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion by defendant for judgment in his favor upon the pleadings. The amended complaint recites an agreement between the Ancient Order of Hibernians and the Fifth Avenue Amusement Company, under which the Fifth Avenue Amusement Company is entitled to the sum of $6,500, with interest; that the said agreement was duly assigned by the defendant Fifth Avenue Amusement Company for a valuable consideration to one Max Kobre about seven weeks prior to the filing of a petition in bankruptcy against the said Max Kobre; that the said Max Kobre, subsequent to the time of the filing of said petition aforesaid, pretended to sell, transfer and deliver all of the right, title and interest which the said Max Kobre had in the assignment of the agreement between the Ancient Order of Hibernians and the Fifth Avenue Amusement Company to the defendant, Hyman D. Baker, which assignment was dated back about two months, and that the same was done without any consideration, fraudulently, preferentially, collusively and with the intent to delay, hinder and defraud his, creditors, while the said Max Kobre was insolvent and was known to be such by himself as well as. said Hyman D. Baker. Plaintiff asked for judgment against the defendant Hyman D. Baker, declaring the assignment from Max Kobre to said Hyman D. Baker void, as preferential and fraudulent against the creditors of Max Kobre’s Bank, as well as this plaintiff, and that the said Hyman D. Baker be directed to immediately deliver up the same so that it lould be canceled. A personal judgment is sought against the Ancient Order of Hibernians,

and that as far as the administratrix of Max Kobre is concerned, that she be barred of any and all rights she may have or claim to have under such assignment and the original agreement upon which it is based.

The following question was certified: “Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ”