North Fork Bank v. Plechner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

North Fork Bank v. Plechner

269 A.D.2d 509, 704 N.Y.S.2d 493, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1996

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 509 (North Fork Bank v. Plechner) 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

North Fork Bank v. Plechner, 269 A.D.2d 509, 704 N.Y.S.2d 493, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1996 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an interpleader action pursuant to CPLR 1006 to determine the ownership of several bank accounts, the defendant Robert M. Plechner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Werner, J.), dated July 26, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendants Gregory Plechner and Robert Plechner for summary judgment and declared, inter alia, that they are the rightful owners of the subject bank accounts.

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The Supreme Court erred when it granted summary judgment to the defendants Gregory Plechner and Robert Plechner declaring them to be the owners of two bank accounts created by their father, the defendant Robert M. Plechner. Although the accounts were created in the names of the sons, questions of fact remain as to whether the father had the donative intent necessary to effectuate a valid inter vivos gift (see, Matter of Leonard v Leonard, 227 AD2d 624; cf., Pell St. Nineteen Corp. v Yue Er Liu Mah, 243 AD2d 121). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an interpleader action pursuant to CPLR 1006 to determine the ownership of several bank accounts, the defendant Robert M. Plechner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Werner, J.), dated July 26, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendants Gregory Plechner and Robert Plechner for summary judgment and declared, inter alia, that they are the rightful owners of the subject bank accounts.

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The Supreme Court erred when it granted summary judgment to the defendants Gregory Plechner and Robert Plechner declaring them to be the owners of two bank accounts created by their father, the defendant Robert M. Plechner. Although the accounts were created in the names of the sons, questions of fact remain as to whether the father had the donative intent necessary to effectuate a valid inter vivos gift (see, Matter of Leonard v Leonard, 227 AD2d 624; cf., Pell St. Nineteen Corp. v Yue Er Liu Mah, 243 AD2d 121). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 509, 704 N.Y.S.2d 493, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1996, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-fork-bank-v-plechner-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack