Hyperlawhypertext legal database Purdy v. Nova Scotia Midland Railway & Iron Co. 28 N.Y.S. 758

← Cases

Purdy v. Nova Scotia Midland Railway & Iron Co.

28 N.Y.S. 758 Court N.Y. City Ct. Decision date 1894-05-18 English

Delivered by EHRLICH, C. J.

Contents

Majority

p. 758
(8 Misc. Rep. 510.)
PURDY v. NOVA SCOTIA MIDLAND RAILWAY & IRON CO., Limited.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
May 18, 1894.)

Headnote

Assignment—Validity as Between the Parties.
An assignment of a claim by a corporation, executed by the president in the presence of the secretary, the corporate seal being affixed, is sufficient to protect the debtor in paying the amount to the assignee, and he therefore cannot question the validity of the assignment in an action by the assignee.
Appeal from trial term.
Action by Edward L. Purdy against the Nova Scotia Midland Railway & Iron Company, Limited. Judgment was entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before EHRLICH, C. J., and VAN WYCK and McCARTHY, JJ.
H. C. Andrews, for appellant.
Tyler, Pratt & Hibbard, for respondent.

The action was to recover for services rendered and materials furnished to the defendant by the New York Bank-Note Company in and about the engraving of certain bonds for the defendant. The claim was assigned by the bank-note company to the plaintiff. The evidence clearly established the performance of the work and furnishing of the material, and that $795, with interest, was due therefor. The assignment was executed

p. 759
by the president of the bank-note company, in the presence of its secretary, and the corporate seal of the company was affixed. The assignment was certainly sufficient to protect the defendant in paying the amount due to the plaintiff, and therefore the defendant cannot seriously question the legality of the transfer. Sheridan v. Mayor, etc., 68 N. Y. 30 . It nowhere appears that the defendant wás entitled to the plates upon which the bonds were printed, and the bonds themselves were delivered and accepted. The verdict of the jury is satisfactorily sustained by the evidence, and finds every fact in favor of the plaintiff which is required to sustain the judgment, which must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cases cited