Merchants Bank v. Gross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Merchants Bank v. Gross

36 A.D.3d 485, 826 N.Y.S.2d 567

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

DecidedJanuary 16, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 36 A.D.3d 485 (Merchants Bank v. Gross) 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

Merchants Bank v. Gross, 36 A.D.3d 485, 826 N.Y.S.2d 567 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered July 22, 2005, which, in an action pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code § 3-[486]*486804 by a presenting bank against the maker of an allegedly lost or stolen promissory note, denied the parties’ motions for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment in favor of either party is precluded by an issue of fact as to whether the note had been received by the maker’s bank. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered July 22, 2005, which, in an action pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code § 3-[486]*486804 by a presenting bank against the maker of an allegedly lost or stolen promissory note, denied the parties’ motions for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment in favor of either party is precluded by an issue of fact as to whether the note had been received by the maker’s bank. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A.D.3d 485, 826 N.Y.S.2d 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merchants-bank-v-gross-nyappdiv-2007.