Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901

Twelfth Ward Bank v. Rogers

Twelfth Ward Bank v. Rogers
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 15, 1901
35 Misc. 789; 72 N.Y.S. 1132

Counsel

Earley & Prendergast (Martin J. Earley, of counsel), for appellant., Charles W. Dayton, for respondent.

Twelfth Ward Bank v. Rogers

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

It seems from the testimony that the defendant received full consideration for his original indorsement. Upon, renewal of the note, he sought to show an agreement with plaintiff’s president that he should be held harmless upon his renewal indorsement. This fact is doubtful, but even if existent, it could *790not affect the plaintiff’s rights, as its president had no power to release its debtor from liability, without consideration.

Present: Scott, P. J., Beach and Fitzgerald, JJ.,

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.