Aritor Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank

New York Supreme Court

Aritor Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank

39 Misc. 2d 427, 240 N.Y.S.2d 615, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1988

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 28, 1963

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 Misc. 2d 427 (Aritor Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aritor Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 39 Misc. 2d 427, 240 N.Y.S.2d 615, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1988 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Irving L. Levey, J.

Defendant Trade Bank and Trust Company moves for dismissal of the complaint for legal insufficiency. Plaintiff was the maker of a check drawn on the defendant the Chase Manhattan Bank and the moving defendant was the collecting bank. The payee’s indorsement was forged. No cause of action exists in favor of the drawer against the moving defendant, the collecting bank (Trojan Pub. Corp. v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 298 N. Y. 771). Sales Promotion Executives Assn. v. Schlinger & Weiss (234 N. Y. S. 2d 785) on which plaintiff relies is an action by the payee, not by the drawer, against the defendant to which the checks were delivered on the forged indorsement of the payee. As an action by the payee, that case is not controlling and nothing therein is inconsistent with Trojan v. Manufacturers Trust Co. (supra). The motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to the moving defendant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Irving L. Levey, J.

Defendant Trade Bank and Trust Company moves for dismissal of the complaint for legal insufficiency. Plaintiff was the maker of a check drawn on the defendant the Chase Manhattan Bank and the moving defendant was the collecting bank. The payee’s indorsement was forged. No cause of action exists in favor of the drawer against the moving defendant, the collecting bank (Trojan Pub. Corp. v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 298 N. Y. 771). Sales Promotion Executives Assn. v. Schlinger & Weiss (234 N. Y. S. 2d 785) on which plaintiff relies is an action by the payee, not by the drawer, against the defendant to which the checks were delivered on the forged indorsement of the payee. As an action by the payee, that case is not controlling and nothing therein is inconsistent with Trojan v. Manufacturers Trust Co. (supra). The motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to the moving defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Misc. 2d 427, 240 N.Y.S.2d 615, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aritor-corp-v-chase-manhattan-bank-nysupct-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack