From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Starasvetsky v. Feldman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1924
208 App. Div. 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Opinion

February, 1924.


Judgment and order reversed on the law, with costs, and motion for summary judgment denied, with ten dollars costs. The affidavit of the defendant, if believed, shows a defense of alteration of the note after its signature by the defendant; and also a defense that the note was not the individual note of the defendant, but was a corporation note, and known by plaintiff to be such. Alteration of a note may be shown under a general denial. ( Boomer v. Koon, 6 Hun, 645; Schwarz v. Oppold, 74 N.Y. 307.) The complaint before us pleads the note according to its legal effect, and the defendant makes general denial. Under the circumstances it is for a jury to determine the truth in the case. Kelly, P.J., Rich, Jaycox, Kelby and Young, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Starasvetsky v. Feldman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1924
208 App. Div. 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)
Case details for

Starasvetsky v. Feldman

Case Details

Full title:SHIRE STARASVETSKY, Respondent, v. PHILIP FELDMAN, Appellant, Impleaded…

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

Date published: Feb 1, 1924

Citations

208 App. Div. 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Citing Cases

De Cesare v. Palazini

In this action to recover against defendant maker on a promissory note, appellant contends that the trial…