Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. Walston & Co.
| Decision Date | 02 July 1968 |
| Citation | 291 N.Y.S.2d 366,22 N.Y.2d 672,238 N.E.2d 754 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | , 238 N.E.2d 754 HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellant, v. WALSTON & CO., Inc., Respondent. . Re |
Joseph A. Kilbourn, New York City, for appellant.
David S. Konheim, New York City, for respondent.
Upon reargument, we adhere to our original determination that Walston did not acquire good title to the certificates in question since they were not transferred in compliance with former section 162 of the Personal Property Law. Since the transfer did not comply with the above-mentioned section Walston is not protected by former sections 166 and 168 of the Personal Property Law and its defense of good faith does not absolve it from liability for converting Bache & Co.'s property (see Pierpoint v. Hoyt, 260 N.Y. 26, 182 N.E. 235, 83 A.L.R. 1195; Casey v. Kastel, 237 N.Y. 305, 142 N.E. 671, 31 A.L.R. 995). Thus, Walston's good faith is not an issue in this case and we need not reach it.
The measure of damages for conversion of stock certificates is the cost of replacement within a reasonable period after the discovery of the conversion, regardless of when the conversion may have occurred (Mayer v. Monzo, 221 N.Y. 442, 446, 117 N.E. 948, 950; Jones v. National Chautauqua County Bank, 272 App.Div. 521, 528, 74 N.Y.S.2d 498, 504). Here the securities were replaced within six business days of the discovery of the conversion at a cost of $87,136.07.
Since no issues of fact remain, the order appealed from should be reversed and judgment directed in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant for $87,136.07, with interest from June 20, 1960 (the settlement date), without costs.
Upon reargument: Order reversed, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Estate of Rothko
...sale and the highest market value within a reasonable time after notice of the conversion (Hartford Acc. & Indem. Corp. v. Walston & Co. Inc., 22 N.Y.2d 672, 291 N.Y.S.2d 366, 238 N.E.2d 754; Mayer v. Monzo, 221 N.Y. 442, 117 N.E. 948; Gelb v. Zimet Bros., 34 Misc.2d 401, 228 N.Y.S.2d 111, ......
-
Caballero v. Anselmo
...discovery of the conversion, regardless of when the conversion may have occurred." Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. Walston & Co., Inc., 22 N.Y.2d 672, 673, 238 N.E.2d 754, 754, 291 N.Y.S.2d 366, 367 (1968); see also Gelb v. Zimet Bros., Inc., 34 Misc.2d 401, 228 N.Y.S.2d 111 (Sup.Ct.1962), af......
-
Bunge Corp. v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.
...Acc. & Ind. Co. v. Walston & Co., 21 N.Y.2d 219, 221, 287 N.Y.S.2d 58, 61, 234 N.E.2d 230, 232, adhered to on rearg. 22 N.Y.2d 672, 291 N.Y.S.2d 366, 238 N.E.2d 754.) Manufacturers asserts that under applicable case law, Caterina merely diverted the official checks, and even assuming Bunge'......
-
Van Gemert v. Boeing Co.
...regardless of when the conversion may have occurred . . . . (Citations omitted). Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Walston & Co., 22 N.Y.2d 672, 673, 291 N.Y.S.2d 366, 367, 238 N.E.2d 754 (1968). This rule does not apply to the facts of the instant case, In both Baker v. Drake, 53 N.Y. 2......