Brown v. . Leavitt
Cases that cite this one
29 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Treadwell v. Lincoln (New York Supreme Court 1889)
- Ph&338nix Insurance Company v. . Church (N.Y. 1880)
- Pratt v. Coman (N.Y. 1868)
- Mechanics Bank v. Chardavoyne (N.J. 1903)
- Bacon v. Heywood (The Superior Court of New York City 1895)
- Phenix Insurance v. Church (New York Court of Common Pleas 1879)
- O'Brien v. . Fleckenstein (N.Y. 1905)
- Hand v. Dinniny (New York Supreme Court 1895)
- Bacon v. Heywood (Superior Court of New York 1895)
- Skinner Engine Co. v. Old Staten Island Dyeing Establishment (New York Court of Common Pleas 1895)
- Bookheim v. Alexander (New York Supreme Court 1892)
- Bookheim v. Alexander (New York Supreme Court 1892)
- Paul v. Paul (New York Supreme Court 1889)
- Fairbanks v. Sargent (New York Supreme Court 1886)
- Callahan v. Bancroft (New York Supreme Court 1883)
- Phenix Insurance v. Church (New York Court of Common Pleas 1878)
- Burkhalter v. Pratt (New York Marine Court 1876)
- Mechanics Traders' Nat. B'k v. . Crow (N.Y. 1875)
- Mechanics & Traders' National Bank v. Crow (N.Y. 1875)
- Moody v. Pell (New York Supreme Court 1875)
- Clothier v. . Adriance (N.Y. 1873)
- National State Bank of Troy v. Hibbard (New York Supreme Court 1873)
- Starin v. Kelly (The Superior Court of New York City 1873)
- Weaver v. . Barden (N.Y. 1872)
- The Park Bank v. . Watson (N.Y. 1870)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The note in suit was indorsed and delivered by Zebley & Co. to plaintiff’s testator, before it fell due, in payment, so far as it went, of a larger note than held by the testator. It was received with other notes, and a balance in cash, as such payment of the larger note, delivered up to Zebley & Co.
In this State it is settled by abundant authority that this transaction constituted the plaintiff’s testator a holder, for value, of the note in question. (Bank of Salina v. Babcock, 21 Wend., 499; Bank of St. Albans v. Gilleland, 23 id., 311; Bank of Sandusky v. Scoville, 24 id., 115; White v. Springfield Bank, 3 Sandf. S. C., 222; Young v. Lee, 18 Barb., 188; S. C. affirmed, 2 Kern., 534; Stetthein, v . Meyer, 33 Barb., 215; Mohawk Bank v. Corey, 1 Hill, 515; Meads v. Bank of Albany, 25 N. Y., 149; Stalker v. McDonald, 6 Hill, 93.)
A further discussion of the question might lead to a suspicion that the law was in doubt on the point,
The judgment should be affirmed.
AH the judges concurring, judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.