Levy v. Arons

2 Citing cases

  1. Matter of Goebel

    65 N.E.2d 174 (N.Y. 1946)   Cited 5 times

    Section 350 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, making branches separate banks for certain purposes of collection inter sese of deposited items, has no bearing on this case. Nor was this a "material alteration" within the language or purpose of sections 205 and 206 of the Negotiable Instruments Law. The change in the check was "to make it express the real bargain of the parties" (LEHMAN, J., in Levy v. Arons, 81 Misc. 165, 166, quoting from Booth v. Powers, 56 N.Y. 22, 31). The orders should be reversed, with costs to all parties appearing separately and filing briefs, and the matter remitted to the Surrogate's Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

  2. Burns v. Crowley

    236 App. Div. 66 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)   Cited 1 times

    Even regarded as an alteration, it was not a material alteration and hence would not void the lease even though it was a specialty. ( Martin v. Tradesmen's Ins. Co., 101 N.Y. 498; Levy v. Arons, 81 Misc. 165; 3 Williston Cont. ยงยง 1901, 1902, 1906.) Moreover, it must be remembered that the defendant did not deny that a valid lease had been entered into between the parties when the dispute first arose between them.