Case ID: ny-sup-ct_22/html/0381-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mullin,' P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE TRUSTEES OF THE FORESTVILLE BAPTIST SOCIETY, Respondent, v. HORATIO N. FARNHAM CHARLES McNEAL AND ASA DOTY, Appellants.
    
      Transfer of note — failure of the consideration therefor — Maher of note cannot set up such failure as a defense to an action thereon'hy the transferee.
    
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered in Chautauqua county upon the report of a referee.
    
      The action was brought to recover of the defendants the amount due on a promissory note made by the defendants for $1,000, and interest, payable to the order of Jonathan tí. Pattison, one year from date, and dated 28th September, 1871, and which was transferred by the payee to the plaintiff. The complaint alleges the incorporation of the plaintiff under the act for the incorporation of religious societies. The answer denied, first, the incorporation of the plaintiff; second, the transfer of the note to it by Pattison.
    The court at General Term, after considering other objections, said: “The consideration for the transfer of the note to Pattison, the payee, was the transfer of land owned by the plaintiff, and which it conveyed to Pattison. The defendants’ counsel insists that plaintiff had no power to sell its land without the consent of the court, and that, consent not having been obtained, the sale is void and the plaintiff acquired no title to the note. The sale of the land may be void, but it does not follow that the transfer of the note to plaintiff did not vest in it a valid title to the note It was entirely competent for Pattison to make a gift of the note to the plaintiff, and the defendant would have no right to object to it. It may be that Pattison can obtain possession of the note from the plaintiff or compel it to pay him the amount due upon it, but the defendants will be protected, in making payments to plaintiff until its title is divested.”
    
      J. G. Record, for the appellants. Julius A. Parsons, for the respondent.
   Opinion by

Mullin,' P. J.

Present — Mullin, P. J., Talcott and Smith, JJ.

Judgment affirmed.