Li-Bet Realty Corp. v. Wiener

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Li-Bet Realty Corp. v. Wiener

15 A.D.2d 909, 226 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10763

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

DecidedMarch 27, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.2d 909 (Li-Bet Realty Corp. v. Wiener) 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

Li-Bet Realty Corp. v. Wiener, 15 A.D.2d 909, 226 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10763 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

The deceased president of the two corporate plaintiffs owned 50% of the stock and their secretary had authority to sign checks. This record presents issues of fact regarding the authority to issue and apply the checks involved in payment of the individual obligations of the former president of the corporate plaintiffs and, in the absence of such authority, the knowledge thereof which defendant had or would have had on reasonable inquiry. The financial transactions between the president and the corporate plaintiffs are material and exclusively within the knowledge of the plaintiffs. In such a ease summary judgment should not be granted and plaintiffs should be required to prove their ease by common-law proof subject to cross-examination. (Kamen V. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 6 A D 2d 406, affd. 6 N Y 2d 737.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Yalente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.

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

The deceased president of the two corporate plaintiffs owned 50% of the stock and their secretary had authority to sign checks. This record presents issues of fact regarding the authority to issue and apply the checks involved in payment of the individual obligations of the former president of the corporate plaintiffs and, in the absence of such authority, the knowledge thereof which defendant had or would have had on reasonable inquiry. The financial transactions between the president and the corporate plaintiffs are material and exclusively within the knowledge of the plaintiffs. In such a ease summary judgment should not be granted and plaintiffs should be required to prove their ease by common-law proof subject to cross-examination. (Kamen V. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 6 A D 2d 406, affd. 6 N Y 2d 737.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Yalente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.2d 909, 226 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/li-bet-realty-corp-v-wiener-nyappdiv-1962.