Case ID: misc2d_19/html/0549-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kass & Company, Inc., Appellant, v. Edward S. Beredyn et al., Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Name of High Grade Manufacturing Co., Respondents.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 4, 1959.
    
      
      Herbst & Herbst (Samuel B. Herbst and Jesse H. Brenner of counsel), for appellant.
    
      Friedman & Friedman (Hyman B. Friedman of counsel), for respondents.
   Per Curiam.

There was no irregularity on the face of either note to put plaintiff on notice that there were any restrictions surrounding the delivery of the notes, nor is there any proof that plaintiff had knowledge thereof.

The order denying summary judgment to plaintiff should be reversed, and summary judgment directed in favor of plaintiff, with $10 costs.

Concur — Hofstadter, J. P., Hecht and Aurelio, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.