AMSTERDAM v. DE PAUL


70 N.J. Super. 196 (1961)

175 A.2d 219

ROBERT AMSTERDAM AND ROSE HOLDER, PARTNERS T/A EASTERN SALES FINANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THOMAS DE PAUL, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided November 6, 1961.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Monroe Jay Lustbader argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Lustbader & Lustbader, attorneys; Mr. Irving Silverman, on the brief).

No appearance for the respondent.

Before Judges GAULKIN, KILKENNY and HERBERT.


The opinion of the court was delivered by KILKENNY, J.A.D.

Plaintiff holder of a negotiable promissory note sued the defendant alone, as alleged co-maker thereof. The Hudson County District Court, sitting without a jury, found that plaintiff was a holder in due course but that the defendant's signature on the instrument was the result of fraud in the factum unaccompanied by negligence on his part. Accordingly, it rendered judgment in favor of the defendant...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases