Legal Opinion

Solicitor for the Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury v. Bankers Trust Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 15, 1952PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLewis, J.

We are to determine whether the record before us serves to qualify Robert William Maitland-Tennent — to whom reference will be made as the applicant — to intervene in this action pursuant to clause (d) of subdivision 1, section 193-b of the Civil Practice Act. That statute, insofar as material to our inquiry, provides: “ § 193-b. Intervention. 1. Upon timely application any person shall be permitted to intervene in an action, including, but not limited to, an action for a sum of money only: * * * (d) when the applicant is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Radford Iron Co. v. Appalachian Electric Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1933
  2. Solicitor for the Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury v. Bankers Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
  3. Harrington Bros. v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1929
  4. Solicitor for Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury v. Bankers Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Solicitor for Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury v. Bankers Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1951

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Menendez v. Faber, Coe & Gregg, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
  2. Aroch v. 391 Broadway LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API