Case ID: ny_228/html/0532-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Vira Cornell, Respondent, v. Seymour W. Bonsall, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.
    
      Cornell v. Bonsall, 187 App. Div. 904, affirmed.
    (Argued January 15, 1920;
    decided February 24, 1920.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme' Court in the second judicial department, entered May 29, 1919, affirming two judgments in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The action was for an accounting by the defendant as to moneys intrusted to him as agent of the plaintiff, of which moneys, or of some of them, it was alleged he made unauthorized and unratified investments, principally in the stock of certain corporations. It was alleged that the defendant absolutely controlled such corporations as the principal owner of the capital stock thereof, and in fact that they were but his creatures, used for the purposes of his own particular business. It was alleged that the investments were not made in the interest of the plaintiff, but in order to appropriate the moneys for the use and benefit of the defendant through those corporations, and that the property was thus employed with the knowledge of said corporations and through the collusion of them with the defendant. It was also alleged that the defendant used a considerable sum of money to purchase land from himself. It was alleged that the defendant became the stepfather of the plaintiff while she was a little child; that thereafter the defendant acted in loco parentis towards her; that plaintiff’s mother died when plaintiff was nine years old, and that thereafter she regarded the defendant as if her father, and extended to him her trust and confidence, while he in turn exercised parental authority and care towards her; and that such was the relation until 1915. It is alleged that in 1913, when she became of age, her property was transferred to her and to. the defendant, and that on that day defendant obtained possession and control of the property by reason of her trust and confidence in him and in her reliance upon his word that he would properly care for the property for her.
    
      
      Abraham Benedict and Adam K. Strieker for appellant.
    
      John F. Brennan and Frank A. Gaynor for respondent.
   Judgments affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Collin, Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin, Andrews and Elkus, JJ.