Crown Worsted Mills, Inc. v. Sheinman

• Decision Date: 13 November 1958
• Citation: 5 N.Y.2d 811,155 N.E.2d 118,181 N.Y.S.2d 207
• Parties: , 155 N.E.2d 118 CROWN WORSTED MILLS, INC., Respondent, v. Nathan L. SHEINMAN et al., Appellants.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 207

181 N.Y.S.2d 207

5 N.Y.2d 811, 155 N.E.2d 118

CROWN WORSTED MILLS, INC., Respondent, v. Nathan L. SHEINMAN et al., Appellants.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Nov. 13, 1958.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 5 A.D.2d 810, 170 N.Y.S.2d 979.

Action was brought for enforcement of defendants' guaranty of payment of debts of certain corporation without deduction by reason of setoff, defense, or counterclaim of corporation. The Supreme Court, New York County, Harold A. Stevens, J., entered judgment against the defendants, and the defendants appealed.

The Appellate Division, 5 A.D.2d 810, 170 N.Y.S.2d 979, affirmed the judgment.

The Appellate Division, 5 A.D.2d 865, 172 N.Y.S.2d 775, denied motion of defendants for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals, 4 N.Y.2d 677, 174 N.Y.S.2d 1026, granted motion of defendants for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

The defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that waiver provisions of agreement of guaranty were against the public policy of the State and void, that the Special Term should have granted summary judgment to defendants, even in absence of a motion to that effect, and that plaintiff, having caused the breach, should be estopped from having the advantage of the waiver provisions, or plaintiff would profit by its own alleged wrong, and that even if waiver provision was not against public policy, the Special Term should have denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and should have directed the joinder of the corporation as principal.

Kresel & Meyerson, New York City (Harold I. Meyerson and Irving L. Weinberger, New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Breed, Abbott & Morgan, New York City (John R. Brook, Stuart H. Johnson, Jr., and Clifford B. Storms, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

All concur.