
    George N. Smith, Appellant, v. Rudolph Dotterweich, Respondent.
    
      Smith v. Dotterweich, 160 App. Div. 913, affirmed.
    (Argued January 26, 1916;
    decided February 22, 1916.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 17, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict in an action to recover upon four promissory notes given by the defendant to plaintiff in renewal of a promissory note for $3,740 given by the defendant to the plaintiff, who was the general agent of the John Hancock Mutual Life Insur- ■ anee Company, to secure the payment of a first premium on life insurance policies of $100,000 on the life of defendant, written by said company. The defense is that the notes in suit, and the original note of which they are a renewal, were given and the insurance policies delivered were so given and delivered upon the agreement and condition precedent that they were not to be valid and binding obligations unless and until the plaintiff had procured for the defendant a loan of $70,000 upon certain collateral, and that such loan was never procured.
    
      William R. Daniels and Raymond C. Voght for appellant.
    
      Allen J. Hastings for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Chase, Cuddeback, Hogan, Cardozo and Pound, JJ.  