Case Name: Meyer Guggenheim, Appellant, v. Samuel Goldberger, Respondent
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1894
Citations: 7 Misc. 740
Docket Number: 
Parties: Meyer Guggenheim, Appellant, v. Samuel Goldberger, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 740–740

Head Matter:
Meyer Guggenheim, Appellant, v. Samuel Goldberger, Respondent.
Appeal from judgment entered in favor of defendant.
Er daman, Lenyy & Mayer, for appellant.
H. Fox, for respondent.

Opinion:
Ehrlich, Ch. J.
The words " for value " were not a necessary averment in the complaint, for the legal presumption supplied the inference, hence the failure to deny was in that respect immaterial, and the facts alleged show that there was no intention to admit a transfer for value.
Indeed, the issue was that the check was given at the solicitation and for the accommodation of the plaintiff, without any consideration, and the jury so found.
Upon such an issue and finding the cases cited by the appellant have no relevancy, and the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.
Fitzsimons, J., concurs.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.