Case Name: LACEY v. STEINHARDT
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1915-12-28
Citations: 156 N.Y.S. 273
Docket Number: 
Parties: LACEY v. STEINHARDT.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 156
Pages: 273–273

Head Matter:
LACEY v. STEINHARDT.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
December 28, 1915.)
Release <@^58—Fraud—Question fob Jury.
In an action for money loaned, on plaintiff’s evidence that he loaned the defendant money, a part of which had been paid, and on a later conference a further amount was paid, and plaintiff signed without reading, but on representation of defendant’s attorney that It was a receipt for the amount paid, what was, in fact, a release of the whole debt, and that defendant then agreed to pay the remainder in a few days, he was entitled to go to the jury on the issues so raised, and direction of verdict for defendant was error.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Release, Cent. Dig. §§ 109-114; Dec. Dig. <S=^>58.]
<§z=>Ear other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
Action by George C. Lacey against Charles Steinhardt. From a judgment on directed verdict for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
Argued November term, 1915, before L-LHMAN, BIJUR, and FINCH, JJ.
George C. Basch, of New York City (Arthur G. Basch and Saul Gordon, both of New York City, on the brief), for appellant.
Loeb, Bernstein & Ash, of New York City (Mortimer B. Bernstein, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
FINCH, J.
This action was brought to recover moneys loaned by the plaintiff to the defendant. The answer set up a defense of payment and a general release.
Plaintiff testified that he made various small loans to defendant during a period of about a year and a half, and such loans aggregated at least $1,579. Thereafter the plaintiff, the defendant, and the latter's attorney had a conference, in which it was agreed that the plaintiff had advanced that amount, and that the defendant had already paid $540 on account. If these figures were correct, there remained due $1,039. The defendant at that conference paid $750 more, and received from the plaintiff a general release under seal. Plaintiff testified that the release was prepared by defendant's attorney, who said it was a "receipt"; that he (the plaintiff) did not read it, but believed it to be merely a receipt «for the $750, though a copy of it was given to him at the time. He further testified that the defendant promised to pay the balance in a few days. If this testimony is true, plaintiff's claim was not without evidence to support it.
The judgment appealed from must be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.