Opinion
December 29, 1961
Appeal from a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury rendered at a Trial Term, Supreme Court, Madison County. In this action for $3,246.33 based on a written guarantee by defendants of the account of one of plaintiff's salesmen, a jury has found a verdict for defendants discharging them of any liability. The theory of defense was that the purported signatures of the defendants on the written guarantee were all forgeries. The testimony of defendants indicates, however, that they signed a paper at the salesman's request to guarantee payment for samples; in the words of one of defendants "going good for samples", but "the limit was $500". The signatures on the instrument on which plaintiff sues, and examples on another exhibit, concededly valid signatures of all defendants, the original exhibits of which are before us, bear a very strong resemblance. The fact that defendants concede they signed an instrument of guarantee for the plaintiff's salesman and the marked resemblance of the two sets of signatures lead us to regard the verdict as being against the weight of the evidence. Indeed, the defense, as thus asserted, seems incredible. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. Bergan, P.J., Gibson, Herlihy and Taylor, JJ., concur.