Reidman v. Long Island Trust Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Reidman v. Long Island Trust Co.

82 Misc. 2d 94, 370 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1975 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2571

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 6, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 82 Misc. 2d 94 (Reidman v. Long Island Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Reidman v. Long Island Trust Co., 82 Misc. 2d 94, 370 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1975 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2571 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. Judgment unanimously reversed, with $10 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff in the sum of $225, with appropriate costs and disbursements in the court below.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the amount prematurely paid by defendant bank on a postdated check drawn on it and issued by plaintiff depositor. Prior to the date of the check, plaintiff requested defendant to stop payment of same and was informed that the check had already been paid. Plaintiff established, upon the trial, that he sustained damages as a result of said payment. The defendant bank failed to prove by any competent evidence that plaintiff had assented to the bank’s regulation limiting its liability (see Gaita v Windsor Bank, 251 NY 152). Accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed for (see Montano v Springfield Gardens Nat. Bank, 207 Misc 840; 5 [now 5A] NY Jur, Banks and Trust Companies, § 342 [now § 373]).

Present: Hogan, P. J., Pittoni and Farley, JJ.

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

Memorandum. Judgment unanimously reversed, with $10 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff in the sum of $225, with appropriate costs and disbursements in the court below.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the amount prematurely paid by defendant bank on a postdated check drawn on it and issued by plaintiff depositor. Prior to the date of the check, plaintiff requested defendant to stop payment of same and was informed that the check had already been paid. Plaintiff established, upon the trial, that he sustained damages as a result of said payment. The defendant bank failed to prove by any competent evidence that plaintiff had assented to the bank’s regulation limiting its liability (see Gaita v Windsor Bank, 251 NY 152). Accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed for (see Montano v Springfield Gardens Nat. Bank, 207 Misc 840; 5 [now 5A] NY Jur, Banks and Trust Companies, § 342 [now § 373]).

Present: Hogan, P. J., Pittoni and Farley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 Misc. 2d 94, 370 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1975 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reidman-v-long-island-trust-co-nyappterm-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack