Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles R. Uebelmesser, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1915-06-18
Citations: 168 A.D. 158
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles R. Uebelmesser, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 168
Pages: 158–168

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles R. Uebelmesser, Appellant.
First Department,
June 18, 1915.
Crime — grand larceny, second degree—fraudulent representations inducing complainant to invest money in corporate stock—evidence.
Where upon the prosecution of one of the members of a so-called corporation for grand larceny in the second degree, in that he had by false and fraudulent representations induced the complainant to invest money in • the stock of the corporation, and as security for such investment had given him deeds of worthless property which were to be reconveyed to the defendants, there was evidence of the fraudulent nature of the scheme sufficient to sustain a conviction, aside from testimony concerning the value of the lots, the admission of such testimony, although unnecessary, was not a sufficient error to require a reversal of the conviction.
Although the defendant did not make any specific representations to the complainant as to the value of the lots given as security for the money invested, and he said that it was not worth the amount of the stock subscribed for, the mere fact that it was given as security for the money invested and that the defendant stipulated that the lots were to be redeeded, implied a representation that they were worth something and may be classed as a false and fraudulent representation tending to establish the fraudulent character of the enterprise.
Dowling, J., dissented, with opinion.
Appeal by the defendant, Charles R. Uebelmesser, from a judgment of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace in and for the county of New York, rendered against him on the 1st day of May, 1914, convicting him of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree.
Martin W. Littleton, for the appellant.
Robert S. Johnstone, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Scott, J.:
I feel constrained to vote for an affirmance of this conviction notwithstanding .the admission of the testimony as to the value or lack of value of the New Jersey lots. It is quite true that Uebelmesser did not make any specific representations to the complaining witness as to the value of the lots given as security for the money invested in the fraudulent enterprise and that he said that it was not worth the amount of the stock subscribed for, but the mere fact that it was given as security for a substantial sum of money invested in the enterprise and that Uebelmesser stipulated that the lots were to be redeeded implied a representation that the lots were worth something. In point of fact it was shown that they were worth nothing or practically nothing. This I think may fairly be classed as a false and fraudulent representation tending to establish the fraudulent character of the enterprise into which the complaining witness was induced to put his money. To be sure there was more than ample evidence of the fraudulent nature of the scheme outside of the testimony concerning the value of the lots, and it may be said that that testimony was unnecessary. But I cannot say that its admission, even if it had better been left out, is a sufficient error to require the reversal of a most just conviction.
The judgment should be affirmed.
Ingraham, P. J., Clarke and Hotchkiss, JJ., concurred; Dowling, J., dissented.