Opinion
January, 1920.
Judgment reversed and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. The plaintiff endeavored to prove an assignment by parol of the contract in suit. An assignment in writing was unnecessary. ( Risley v. Phenix Bank of City of N Y, 83 N.Y. 318; Greene v. Republic Fire Ins. Co., 84 id. 572; Fairbanks v. Sargent, 117 id. 320.) The exclusion of conversations between the assignor and plaintiff's president, at folios 131, 132, 133 and 134, was error. A parol assignment being sufficient, the plaintiff was entitled to prove the conversation by means of which that assignment was made. Rich, Putnam, Blackmar, Kelly and Jaycox, JJ., concur.