Majority
p. 959KAHN v. EISENBERG et al. (two cases). (Supreme Court, Appellate Term. February 27, 1906.) Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and GIEGERICH and GREEN-BAUM, JJ.
Headnote
Guaranty—Construction of Writing.An instrument guarantying that defendant would pay a certain note and any expense involved in collecting it was a guaranty of payment, and not of collection.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 25, Cent. Dig. Guaranty, § 37.]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District.
Action by Bertha Kahn against Nettie Eisenberg and others. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Nathaniel Levy, for appellants.
Wasserman & Jacobus, for respondent.
The instrument sued upon guarantied, in the event the notes in question were not paid when due, that the defendants would “jointly and severally pay the said notes and any expenses involved in the collection of this claim.” This was clearly a guaranty of payment, and not of collection. There was ample evidence to sustain the conclusion reached by the trial justice, and we find no reversible errors in the rulings made.
Judgments affirmed, with costs.