Bailey v. Claflin

Decided January 5, 1891

The Superior Court of New York City · decided 1891-01-05

<p>Replevin—Fraudulent representations—Bona fide purchaser.</p> <p>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.</p>

Decided 1891-01-05

Per Curiam.

¶1This 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.

¶2. 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.

¶3Sedgwick, Ch. J., Freedman and Ingraham, JJ., concur.