The  eodifiers  in  their  note  say  tliat  tlie  phrase  "  but  this  section
shall  not  be  deemed  to  authorize  the  assignment  of  a  thing  in  action
not  arising  out  of  contract,"  which  was  contained  in  section  111  of  the
old  Code,  has  given  rise  to  a  very  large  number  of  adjudications,  and
that  these  provisions  will  supersede  nearly  all  this  vast  mass  of  ad-
judications, while  the  remainder  will  be  valuable  only  because  the
section  has  been  confined  to  the  enforcement  of  causes  of  action  and
is,  therefore,  inapplicable  to  questions  arising  upon  defenses  other
than  coanter-claims,  and  to  the  regulations  of  law  respecting  the
transfer  of  property,  including  those  vague  interests  which  are  not
properly  embraced  by  the  phrase  "  a  cause  of  action,"  and  that  as  to
the  latter  class,  their  connection  with  the  provision  referred  to  above
is  usually  quite  remote,  and  they  may  be  left  to  be  regulated  by  gen-'
eral  principles  witliout  any  special  statutory  provision. It  is  further
stated  by  the  eodifiers  that  the  section  settles  the  disputed  questions
relating  to  the  assignability  of  causes  of  action,  by  providing  that
every  cause  of  action  is  assignable  unless  it  comes  within  one  of  the
special  exceptions. The  general  rule  to  be  derived  from  the  author-
ities is  that  the  test  of  assignability  of  the  cause  of  action  is  whether
it  would  pass  to  the  executor  or  administrator,  but  this  is  too  vague
a  test  for  actual  use  in  many  cases,  and  has  given  rise  to  different
and  difficult  questions. In  view  of  the  radical  changes  made  by  this
section,  no  attempt  will  be  made  to  collate  all  the  decisions  previous
to  their  enactment,  and  references  will  be  made  to  only  such  as  are
more  important  and  may  be  of  service  as  the  law  now  stands. Sec-
tion 1909  does  not  prescribe  that  an  action  on  such  claim  can  be
brought  by  the  assignee  only,  under  the  same  circumstances  which
would  have  entitled  the  assignor  to  sue,  and  hence  a  judgment  may
be  sued  upon  by  an  assignee  without  leave  of  the  court. Carp  nter
V. Butler,  29  Hun,  251. 