Blake v. Federal Land Bank of Springfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blake v. Federal Land Bank of Springfield

106 A.D.2d 882, 483 N.Y.S.2d 500, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21791

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 14, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 106 A.D.2d 882 (Blake v. Federal Land Bank of Springfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blake v. Federal Land Bank of Springfield, 106 A.D.2d 882, 483 N.Y.S.2d 500, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21791 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the [883]*883following memorandum: Plaintiffs have no cause of action against the Federal Land Bank. The shares of stock held by the bank as collateral for plaintiffs’ loan were shares of stock in the bank which had been purchased by the Federal Land Bank Association of the Finger Lakes. In order for plaintiffs to become eligible for a loan from the bank, they were required to become members of the association and to buy shares in the association in an amount equal to 5% of their loan. Five per cent of the loan proceeds was allocated by the bank to the association for such purchase. The association then purchased a like amount of stock in the bank. Under the statutory scheme, the bank was required to retire those shares “upon the full repayment of the loan”, and was entitled to cancel the stock where, as here, the loan was in default (US Code, tit 12, § 2034). Moreover, since the stock was the property of the association and not that of plaintiffs, plaintiffs have no recourse against the bank (see US Code, tit 12, §§ 2016-2034; Byrne v Federal Land Bank, 61 ND 265; 9 CJS, Banks and Banking, § 885, subd a). (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ. [122 Misc 2d 71.]

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

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the [883]*883following memorandum: Plaintiffs have no cause of action against the Federal Land Bank. The shares of stock held by the bank as collateral for plaintiffs’ loan were shares of stock in the bank which had been purchased by the Federal Land Bank Association of the Finger Lakes. In order for plaintiffs to become eligible for a loan from the bank, they were required to become members of the association and to buy shares in the association in an amount equal to 5% of their loan. Five per cent of the loan proceeds was allocated by the bank to the association for such purchase. The association then purchased a like amount of stock in the bank. Under the statutory scheme, the bank was required to retire those shares “upon the full repayment of the loan”, and was entitled to cancel the stock where, as here, the loan was in default (US Code, tit 12, § 2034). Moreover, since the stock was the property of the association and not that of plaintiffs, plaintiffs have no recourse against the bank (see US Code, tit 12, §§ 2016-2034; Byrne v Federal Land Bank, 61 ND 265; 9 CJS, Banks and Banking, § 885, subd a). (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ. [122 Misc 2d 71.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.2d 882, 483 N.Y.S.2d 500, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blake-v-federal-land-bank-of-springfield-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack