Takenaka v. Bankers Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Takenaka v. Bankers Trust Co.

225 A.D. 860

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1929·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Determination affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Dowling, P. J., Merrell, Finch, O’Malley and Proskauer, JJ.; Dowling, P. J., and Finch, J., dissent upon the ground that it affirmatively appears by the testimony of the plaintiff’s own witness, the accountant, that the plaintiff’s duty in respect to the returned checks, as laid down in Stumpp v. Bank of New York (212 App. Div. 608), had not been discharged. [132 Misc. 322.]

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

Determination affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Dowling, P. J., Merrell, Finch, O’Malley and Proskauer, JJ.; Dowling, P. J., and Finch, J., dissent upon the ground that it affirmatively appears by the testimony of the plaintiff’s own witness, the accountant, that the plaintiff’s duty in respect to the returned checks, as laid down in Stumpp v. Bank of New York (212 App. Div. 608), had not been discharged. [132 Misc. 322.]

Takenaka v. Bankers Trust Co., 225 A.D. 860 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

225 A.D. 860 (Takenaka v. Bankers Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related