Case Name: THE HOWE MACHINE COMPANY, Respondent, v. JAMES A. FAGAN, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1876-06
Citations: 15 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 174
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE HOWE MACHINE COMPANY, Respondent, v. JAMES A. FAGAN, Appellant.
Judges: Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith: and Taloott, JJ.
Reporter: Supreme Court Reports (Hun)
Volume: 15
Pages: 174–174

Head Matter:
THE HOWE MACHINE COMPANY, Respondent, v. JAMES A. FAGAN, Appellant.
Receipt — when evidence of a promise to pay to another, the money received.
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered on the verdict of a jury.
This was an action to recover from the defendant moneys which he had assumed to receive from one Charles Good, a debtor of the plaintiff, to be applied on a note of Good held by the plaintiff.
The defendant had been an agent of the plaintiff for the purpose of selling its machines, and had sold one to Good. Good had given his note to the plaintiff for sixty-five dollars. Before the maturity of the note Good paid the sixty-five dollars to the defendant, who agreed to apply the same on, and therewith take up, the note given for the machine. The defendant gave Good at the time his receipt as follows:
“ $65. Eeceived from Charles Good sixty-five dollars to take up machine note. Boonville, December 19, 1872.
“J. A. FAGAN.”
There was no promise to pay the money over to the plaintiff proved other than that contained in the writing.
The court at General Term say: “We think the receipt furnished sufficient prima facie evidence of such a promise within the case of Lawrence v. Fox (20 N. Y., 268).”
Alfred 0. Ooxe, for the appellant. George F. Danforth, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Taloott, J.
Present — Mullin, P. J., Smith: and Taloott, JJ.
Judgment affirmed.