Case Name: Howard N. Bailey, Resp't, v. John Claflin et al., Appl'ts
Court: New York Superior Court General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-01-05
Citations: 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 82
Docket Number: 
Parties: Howard N. Bailey, Resp’t, v. John Claflin et al., Appl’ts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 36
Pages: 82–82

Head Matter:
Howard N. Bailey, Resp’t, v. John Claflin et al., Appl’ts.
(New York Superior Court, General Term,
Filed January 5, 1891.)
Replevin—Fraudulent representations—Bona fide purchaser.
In an ac ion to replevin goods alleged to have been purchased through fraudulent repersentations the referee found, on sufficient evidence, that the defendants Claflin & Co. were not innocent, bona fide purchasers thereof from the firm to which plaintiff’s assignors sold the goods, hut obtained possession with full knowledge of the insolvency of the firm and with intent to to aid in defrauding its creditors. Defendants gave no evidence. Held,, that a judgment in plaintiff's favor would not he disturbed.
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee in favor of the plaintiff against the defendants for the possession of certain personal property, or for the sum of $685.61, the value thereof, in case a delivery cannot be had, and the costs of said action.
S. F. Fhedand, for app’lts ; Abram Fling, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This case appears to have been tried on the same testimony upon which the case of Eckhardt against the same defendant was tried, and the report of the referee and the judgment entered thereon were substantially the same in both cases. That case was appealed to this court and affirmed.
. As the same questions were presented in both' cases it follows that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with, costs, on the opinion in Eckhardt v. Epstein, 33 N. Y. State Rep., 806.
Sedgwick, Ch. J., Freedman and Ingraham, JJ., concur.