Case Name: New Rochelle Securities Company, Respondent, v. International Thrift Society, Inc., and Another, Defendants; Milton Mayer and Another, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1935-05
Citations: 244 A.D. 824
Docket Number: 
Parties: New Rochelle Securities Company, Respondent, v. International Thrift Society, Inc., and Another, Defendants; Milton Mayer and Another, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 244
Pages: 824–824

Head Matter:
New Rochelle Securities Company, Respondent, v. International Thrift Society, Inc., and Another, Defendants; Milton Mayer and Another, Appellants.

Opinion:
— On the court's own motion, the decision of this court handed down on May 10, 1935 [ante, p. 810], is hereby amended to read as follows: Judgment in so far as it affects appellants reversed on the law, with costs, and complaint as to appellants dismissed, with costs. Action against the maker and accommodation indorsers on a negotiable demand note. It appears from the face of the instrument that its date was changed from September 9, 1930, to November 17, 1930. Therefore, plaintiff's assignors were not holders in due course. (Neg. Inst. Law, § 91; Elias v. Whitney, 50 Misc. 326.) Such alteration, subsequent to appellants' indorsements and without their knowledge or consent, relieved them from liability. (Neg. Inst. Law, § 205, 206; Golden v. Furniture Frame Factories, Inc., 235 App. Div. 704; Manufacturers Trust Co. v. Steinhardt, 265 N. Y. 145.) The note was not presented for payment or protested until after the lapse of one year. Under the circumstances here, this exceeds a reasonable time and appellants were discharged by respondent's delay. (American Trust Co. v. Manley, 195 App. Div. 811.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur; Tompkins, J., concurs on the ground that the change was a material one and that payment of the note was not demanded within a reasonable time.