Rosenblum v. Mfrs. Trust Co.

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtO'BRIEN
Citation270 N.Y. 79,200 N.E. 587
PartiesROSENBLUM v. MANUFACTURERS TRUST CO. et al.
Decision Date03 March 1936

270 N.Y. 79
200 N.E. 587

ROSENBLUM
v.
MANUFACTURERS TRUST CO. et al.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 3, 1936.


Action in equity by Gertrude F. Rosenblum against the Manufacturers Trust Company and others. From a judgment of the Appellate Division, First Department, reversing an order of Special Term which denied a motion to dismiss the complaint and dismissing the complaint on the pleadings (245 App.Div. 333, 280 N.Y.S. 262), plaintiff appeals.

Judgment of the Appellate Division reversed and orders of the Special Term affirmed.

LEHMAN, J., dissenting.


[270 N.Y. 80]Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Joseph J. Corn and Arnold Le Bell, both of New York City, for appellant.

270 N.Y. 81]James S. Hays and Milton Kunen, both of New York City, for respondent Manufacturers Trust Co.
[270 N.Y. 82]Sidney R. Fleisher, of New York City, for infants, respondents Edward and Dorothy Rosenblum.

[270 N.Y. 83]O'BRIEN, Judge.

Plaintiff was named as beneficiary in several policies of life insurance issued to her husband by the Mutual Life Insurance Company. He reserved the right to change the beneficiary and he did change from plaintiff to the Manufacturers Trust Company as trustee. After the husband's death, which occurred in December, 1932, this action was begun by the widow for the purpose of canceling the instruments by which the change of beneficiary was effected and for the purpose of obtaining a judgment decreeing that she is entitled to payment of the proceeds of the policies. The complaint alleges that the change of beneficiary was made under a mistake of tact by the husband. The questions before us are whether plaintiff has such an interest as enables her to maintain the action and whether, as a pleading, the complaint is otherwise sufficient.

As long as plaintiff remained the named beneficiary in the policies, she was in possession of a property right in the subject-matter of this litigation. Her interest in the policies was not vested in the sense that her right could not be divested, but, until this right, subject as it was to defeasance, was taken from her with an intent based upon full comprehension of the consequences of the act, a property right of some description continued to reside in her. Prudential Ins. Co. v. Stone, 270 N.Y. --, 200 N.E. - $, decided herewith. She is, therefore, more than a volunteer or a donee and upon proper allegations and substantial proof may maintain an action to cancel the instruments by which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 practice notes
  • Ricketts v. Pennsylvania R. Co., No. 122.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 10 Enero 1946
    ...App.Div. 487, 253 N.Y.S. 524; Seidman v. New York Life Ins. Co., 162 Misc. 560, 296 N.Y.S. 55, 56; Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587, 105 A.L.R. 947; Harper, Inc., v. City of Newburgh, 159 App.Div. 695, 145 N.Y.S. 59; City of New York v. Seely-Taylor Co., 1......
  • Ferrero Const. Co. v. Dennis Rourke Corp., No. 139
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • 1 Septiembre 1985
    ...168 (1975); Peterson v. First National Bank of Ceylon, 162 Minn. 369, 375, 203 N.W. 53 (1925); Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 84-85, 200 N.E. 587 (1936); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 151 comment b (1981); E. Farnsworth, Contracts, § 9.2, at 649 1 See Weitzmann v. ......
  • Middle East Banking Co. v. State Street Bank Intern., Nos. 680
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 4 Junio 1987
    ...side may be ground for rescinding but not for reforming a contract." 288 N.Y.S.2d at 582 (quoting Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587, 588, 105 A.L.R. 947 (1936)). The case is hardly authority for ruling against State Street's effort to rescind its mistaken r......
  • U.S. v. General Douglas MacArthur Senior Village, Inc., Nos. 23
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 11 Noviembre 1974
    ...when it was paid for a lien it could not itself enforce against the federal mortgage interest. See Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587 While a benevolent casuistry may have been necessary in earlier days to convert a mistake of law into a mistake of fact in o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
38 cases
  • Ricketts v. Pennsylvania R. Co., No. 122.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 10 Enero 1946
    ...App.Div. 487, 253 N.Y.S. 524; Seidman v. New York Life Ins. Co., 162 Misc. 560, 296 N.Y.S. 55, 56; Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587, 105 A.L.R. 947; Harper, Inc., v. City of Newburgh, 159 App.Div. 695, 145 N.Y.S. 59; City of New York v. Seely-Taylor Co., 1......
  • Ferrero Const. Co. v. Dennis Rourke Corp., No. 139
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • 1 Septiembre 1985
    ...168 (1975); Peterson v. First National Bank of Ceylon, 162 Minn. 369, 375, 203 N.W. 53 (1925); Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 84-85, 200 N.E. 587 (1936); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 151 comment b (1981); E. Farnsworth, Contracts, § 9.2, at 649 1 See Weitzmann v. ......
  • Middle East Banking Co. v. State Street Bank Intern., Nos. 680
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 4 Junio 1987
    ...side may be ground for rescinding but not for reforming a contract." 288 N.Y.S.2d at 582 (quoting Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587, 588, 105 A.L.R. 947 (1936)). The case is hardly authority for ruling against State Street's effort to rescind its mistaken r......
  • U.S. v. General Douglas MacArthur Senior Village, Inc., Nos. 23
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 11 Noviembre 1974
    ...when it was paid for a lien it could not itself enforce against the federal mortgage interest. See Rosenblum v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 270 N.Y. 79, 85, 200 N.E. 587 While a benevolent casuistry may have been necessary in earlier days to convert a mistake of law into a mistake of fact in o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT