
    Level Trading Corporation, Respondent, v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 30, 1936.
    
      Greenhill & Oreenhill [Simon Greenhill of counsel], for the appellant. Robert Jablin, for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

Plaintiff, a finance company, was only protected against conversion by its customer. When the latter defaulted, plaintiff sued her on the promissory note and was defeated by a counterclaim for breach of warranty. The result of this suit confirmed the rightful possession of the car by the customer and made a claim against defendant insurance company ineffective because no conversion could thereafter be proved.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted.

Levy and Hammer, JJ., concur; Callahan, J., dissents, with memorandum.

Callahan, J.

The defense of interference with defendant’s right of subrogation by attempting to collect the debt would be inequitable and subrogation is an equitable doctrine.

At least issues of fact exist as to these defenses.

I vote to affirm.  