Crimens v. Crimens

248 A.D. 675

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff brought this action in equity, and, from the whole record, the equities are not in his favor. Moreover, an accounting is not the proper remedy to recover one’s share in a bank account owned by two people as joint tenants. (Niehaus v. Niehaus, 141 App. Div. 251.) Plaintiff is not entitled to an accounting for the profits of the lunch car operations because there is ample evidence to sustain the referee’s finding that the lunch car business was, with plaintiff’s acquiescence and consent, defendant’s sole individual venture. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an action to compel accounting for withdrawal from joint bank account.) Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgcomb, Crosby and Lewis, JJ.

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

Crimens v. Crimens, 248 A.D. 675 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

248 A.D. 675 (Crimens v. Crimens) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Niehaus v. Niehaus
141 A.D. 251 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)