Schaffer v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schaffer v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.

262 A.D. 1054, 30 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7193

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

DecidedOctober 1, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 1054 (Schaffer v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.) 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

Schaffer v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co., 262 A.D. 1054, 30 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7193 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Special Term entered in Schenectady county clerk’s office on September 10, 1936, denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out the fifth and partial defense contained in the amended answer of the defendant City Bank Farmers Trust Company. This action is brought to recover the amount of a bank account opened in the name of Schaffer and Lake in the predecessor of the defendant bank. The fifth and partial defense contained in the defendant bank’s answer alleges, in effect, that the plaintiff was not the owner of the account and that the bank had paid the amount thereof to certain other persons. Order unanimously affirmed, with twenty-five dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Bliss, Heffeman and Foster, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Special Term entered in Schenectady county clerk’s office on September 10, 1936, denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out the fifth and partial defense contained in the amended answer of the defendant City Bank Farmers Trust Company. This action is brought to recover the amount of a bank account opened in the name of Schaffer and Lake in the predecessor of the defendant bank. The fifth and partial defense contained in the defendant bank’s answer alleges, in effect, that the plaintiff was not the owner of the account and that the bank had paid the amount thereof to certain other persons. Order unanimously affirmed, with twenty-five dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Bliss, Heffeman and Foster, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 1054, 30 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schaffer-v-city-bank-farmers-trust-co-nyappdiv-1941.