Schweiger v. German Savings Bank

27 Misc. 123, 57 N.Y.S. 356
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1899
StatusPublished

This text of 27 Misc. 123 (Schweiger v. German Savings Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Schweiger v. German Savings Bank, 27 Misc. 123, 57 N.Y.S. 356 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

Opinion

Giegerich, J.

The fact that the plaintiff was defeated upon his motion for an injunction to restrain a payment by the bank to the rival claimants of the fund does not conclude the question as to the validity of the plaintiffs claim. It may be that plaintiffs case will be found stronger at the trial than it was made to appear upon application for a provisional remedy. The claim is made by verified complaint and it sufficiently appears that the bank would make the payment to the other claimants at some substantial risk. I think that a case for interpleader is made out both under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Banking Law.

Motion granted.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 Misc. 123, 57 N.Y.S. 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schweiger-v-german-savings-bank-nysupct-1899.