Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company, Appellant, v. George T. Patterson, Assignee, etc., et al., Respondents, 1878 — 75 N.Y. 589 · caselaw · US
Corporations
The Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company, Appellant, v. George T. Patterson, Assignee, etc., et al., Respondents
75 N.Y. 589·New York Court of Appeals·1878·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
The Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company, Appellant, v. George T. Patterson, Assignee, etc., et al., Respondents.
(Argued October 1, 1878;
decided November 12, 1878.)
The complaint in this action alleged, in substance, that plaintiff executed to McDonald, Dillout & Company, a corporation organized under the laws of this State, certain premises in the city of New York for the term of five years from May 1, 1874. That the lease was assigned by said corporation to defendant Patterson, who entered into possession February 20, 1875, and continued in possession until May 1, 1875. The action was to recover a quarter’s rent falling due by the terms of the lease on that day.
It appeared that on February 15, 1875, said corporation having became insolvent, an agreement was entered into, in which plaintiff and defendant and the other creditors of the company joined, advising an assignment by it for the benefit of creditors, and which provided that the rent then due and which should accrue on the lease up to May 1, 1875, should be deemed a valid claim against the company, and should be paid pro rata under the contemplated assignment. The creditors executing it agreed to accept the amount they should receive under the assignment “ in full satisfaction of their respective claims against the company.” An assignment was made as contemplated by the agreement February 21, 1875, and in pursuance of the request of the creditors, Patterson accepted the trust primarily as appointee and agent of the creditors. Held, that Patterson could not be charged personally as assignee of the lease, also that the fact that the assignment was set aside as void under the statute, did not impose such liability, as it would be in contravention of the agreement.
F. C. Cantine for appellant.
J. Hampden Dougherty for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Andrews, J.,]
Andrews, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur, except Miller and Earl, JJ., absent. Judgment affirmed.