Hyperlawhypertext legal database Realty Transfer Co. v. Kimball 121 N.Y.S. 279

← Cases

Realty Transfer Co. v. Kimball

121 N.Y.S. 279 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1910-02-18 English

Delivered by BIJUR, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 279
(66 Misc. Rep. 185.)
REALTY TRANSFER CO. v. KIMBALL.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
February 18, 1910.)

Headnote

Principal and Agent (§ 105[1] )—Authority of Agent—Receipt of Payments.
Authority of agent to receive payment of indebtedness does not confer upon him power to do so before maturity, and payment by a tenant of rent, due May 1st, on April 2Sth, to the landlord’s agent, where it does not appear that the landlord ratified the premature payment, or received the money, did not constitute a payment of the rent.
[Ed. Note.-—For other cases, see Principal and Agent, Cent. Dig. §§ 298, 299; Dec. Dig. § 105.[1] ]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.
Action by the Realty Transfer Company against Charles E. Kimball. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed, and new trial ordered.
Argued before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and BIJUR, JJ.
Horace London, for appellant.
Thomas A. McCole, for respondent.

The action was for the’ recovery of $50, being one month’s rent, for the month of May, due on the 1st of May, under a written lease entered into between plaintiff and defendant.

Apart from any question as to the weight of evidence, the testimony of defendant was that he had paid the rent due May 1st to plaintiff’s agent on the 28th day of April, and there is no proof or attempt to prove that plaintiff ratified this premature payment, or actually received the money from the agent. Authority to an agent to receive payment of an indebtedness does not confer upon him the power to receive payment before maturity. Smith v. Kidd et al., 68 N. Y. 130 , 141, 23 Am. Rep. 157 .

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

Cases cited