From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leask v. Dew

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 6, 1906
77 N.E. 1190 (N.Y. 1906)

Summary

In Leask v. Dew, 102 App. Div. (N.Y.) 529; affirmed in 184 N.Y. 599, the provision in question was applied to a gratuitous relinquishment, as was also the case in Edwards v. Walters, L.R. 2 Ch. 157, (1896) and Francis v. Bruce, L.R. 44 Ch. Div. 627 (1890), where a similar clause in the English Bills of Exchange Act was considered.

Summary of this case from Whitcomb v. Nat'l Ex. Bank

Opinion

Argued March 22, 1906

Decided April 6, 1906

John M. Scribner for appellant.

T.S. Ormiston for respondents.


Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: CULLEN, Ch. J., GRAY, EDWARD T. BARTLETT, HAIGHT, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT and CHASE, JJ.


Summaries of

Leask v. Dew

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 6, 1906
77 N.E. 1190 (N.Y. 1906)

In Leask v. Dew, 102 App. Div. (N.Y.) 529; affirmed in 184 N.Y. 599, the provision in question was applied to a gratuitous relinquishment, as was also the case in Edwards v. Walters, L.R. 2 Ch. 157, (1896) and Francis v. Bruce, L.R. 44 Ch. Div. 627 (1890), where a similar clause in the English Bills of Exchange Act was considered.

Summary of this case from Whitcomb v. Nat'l Ex. Bank
Case details for

Leask v. Dew

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE LEASK et al., as Executors of OLIVER W. BUCKINGHAM, Deceased…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 6, 1906

Citations

77 N.E. 1190 (N.Y. 1906)
77 N.E. 1190

Citing Cases

Whitcomb v. Nat'l Ex. Bank

" This ruling was followed in the later case of Pitt v. Little (Wash.), 108 P. 941. In Leask v. Dew, 102 App.…