From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rogers v. Reynolds

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1929
226 App. Div. 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)

Opinion

May, 1929.


Order denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Defendant did not show by evidentiary facts that plaintiff had any knowledge of the alleged fraud perpetrated upon her by the W.J. Howey Company, from which plaintiff purchased the note for full value before maturity, and, therefore, did not establish an issuable fact with respect to whether or not plaintiff was a holder in due course. Lazansky, P.J., Young, Hagarty, Seeger and Carswell, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rogers v. Reynolds

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1929
226 App. Div. 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
Case details for

Rogers v. Reynolds

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM JUDSON ROGERS, Appellant, v. ANNE T. REYNOLDS, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 1, 1929

Citations

226 App. Div. 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)

Citing Cases

Fischer v. Plum

Defendant did not show by evidentiary facts that plaintiff had any knowledge of the alleged false and…