From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stutson v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Feb 10, 1939
170 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1939)

Opinion

February 10, 1939.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, County of Bronx.

William Lurie [ David S. Konheim of counsel], for the appellant.

David Greenstein, for the respondents.


The finding of the Virginia court that Louis H. Stutson was a fraudulent assignee may be availed of as a defense by the defendant. A recovery against the principal in an action to which the surety is not a party is not conclusive upon the surety where the covenant is one of general indemnity merely against claims or suits. It was error, therefore, to strike out the first and second defenses. ( Adams v. United States Fidelity Guaranty Co., 239 A.D. 525; affd., 264 N.Y. 550; Sears, Roebuck Co. v. 9th Avenue-31st St. Corp., 274 id. 388.)

Order modified by reinstating the first and second defenses, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

All concur. Present — HAMMER, SHIENTAG and NOONAN, JJ.


Summaries of

Stutson v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Feb 10, 1939
170 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1939)
Case details for

Stutson v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS H. STUTSON and S. DAVID STUTSON, Individually and as Assignee of…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Feb 10, 1939

Citations

170 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1939)
10 N.Y.S.2d 749