Hatzlachh Supply Co. v. Bank of America

616 N.E.2d 847, 81 N.Y.2d 1031, 600 N.Y.S.2d 190, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 1728
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 8, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 616 N.E.2d 847 (Hatzlachh Supply Co. v. Bank of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hatzlachh Supply Co. v. Bank of America, 616 N.E.2d 847, 81 N.Y.2d 1031, 600 N.Y.S.2d 190, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 1728 (N.Y. 1993).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The Appellate Division properly concluded that plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment. In its motion for summary judgment, plaintiff established that defendant improperly allowed release of the title to the purchased goods and that plaintiff was damaged in the amount of $161,078.58. The uncontroverted proof showed that plaintiff delivered to defendant a collection order for the goods which authorized release of documents of title only upon payment of $161,078.58 or [1033]*1033upon receipt of a guarantee of payment from Savannah Bank. Defendant concedes that it delivered to Savannah Bank a modified collection order allowing for delivery of documents of title without payment or a guarantee of payment. Plaintiff was thereafter unable to collect the $161,078.58 due from the purchaser.

We find no merit to defendant’s contention that the proof failed to show that the documents of title had been transferred. Defendant’s concession that it delivered the collection order to Savannah Bank proves that the documents of title were transferred since the collection order was expressly subject to the International Chamber of Commerce Uniform Rules for Collections which require delivery of documents of title with collection orders.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

Kay-Bee Toys Corp. v. Winston Sports Corp.
214 A.D.2d 457 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Donnell v. Madison Avenue-53rd Street Corp.
214 A.D.2d 307 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
616 N.E.2d 847, 81 N.Y.2d 1031, 600 N.Y.S.2d 190, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 1728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatzlachh-supply-co-v-bank-of-america-ny-1993.