Criminal Law · MBE-tested
John Duncan, Respondent, v. Charles A. Stoneham and Another, as Partners, Trading under the Firm Name of Charles A. Stoneham & Co., and Individually, Appellants, Impleaded with Others, Defendants
223 A.D. 820·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1928·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
John Duncan, Respondent, v. Charles A. Stoneham and Another, as Partners, Trading under the Firm Name of Charles A. Stoneham & Co., and Individually, Appellants, Impleaded with Others, Defendants.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the New York county clerk’s office on June 25, 1927, and also from an order dated June 9, 1927, and entered in said clerk’s office.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
When this action is viewed in the light of a conspiracy to defraud (of which there was ample evidence to sustain the finding of the jury) resulting in transferring the obligation to the bankrupt and leaving the assets with the appellants, the alleged errors largely disappear. Those which remain must be disregarded for the reason stated in the opinion per curiam in.the case of Harford v. Stoneham (ante, p. 820), herewith handed down. The judgment and order appealed from should, therefore, be affirmed, with costs. Present-— Dowling, P. J., Merrell, Finch, McAvoy and Proskauer, JJ. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.