Legal Opinion
Coopersmith v. Maunz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 7, 1929PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSears, P. J.
The facts and the questions of law involved in the two actions, so far as these appeals are concerned, are identical. A certain corporation known as the Otis Oil Burner Corporation secured from these defendants acceptances of certain instruments, in writing, of one of which the following is a copy:
“ Trade Acceptance
“Acceptance Number No. 1 New York, N. Y. Sept. 30, 1925 “ To Christopher J. Rasp, P. 0. 1784 Genesee St. Buffalo, N. Y.
“ Sixty days after date pay to the order of ourselves at New York, N. Y., the sum of . . . two hundred . . . dollars.
“Accepted at Buffalo, N. Y. On Sept. 30, 1925.
“…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Carlisle v. . NorrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- National Bank of Newbury v. WentworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Old Colony Trust Company v. StumpelNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Lane Co. v. CrumTexas Commission of Appeals · 1927
- Merchants National Bank of St. Paul v. Santa Maria Sugar Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Soma v. HandrulisNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
- Matthysse v. Securities Processing Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1977
- Chartered Bank v. American Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1965
- First Bank of Marianna v. Havana Canning Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1940
- First National Bank v. Power Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1930
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.