Smith v. Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank
City of New York Municipal Court
On motion for an order of interpleader. Code Civil Proe. § 820, provides that “a defendant, against, whom an action to recover upon a contract * * * is pending, may, at any time before answer, upon proof by affidavit that a person not a party to the action makes a demand against him for the same debt, * * * without collusion with him,” apply for an order substituting such person in his place, and discharging him fi:om liability to either, on paying the amount into court, and…
Read the full summary
On motion for an order of interpleader. Code Civil Proe. § 820, provides that “a defendant, against, whom an action to recover upon a contract * * * is pending, may, at any time before answer, upon proof by affidavit that a person not a party to the action makes a demand against him for the same debt, * * * without collusion with him,” apply for an order substituting such person in his place, and discharging him fi:om liability to either, on paying the amount into court, and that the court may in its discretion make such an order. Section 315 gives the marine court (now the city court) of the…
1Opinion of the CourtPitshke, J.
This is an action at law to recover money deposited with the defendant, a savings bank, by plaintiff. Their relation is that of debtor and creditor. Chapman v. White, 6 N. Y. 417; Downes v. Bank, 6 Hill, 297, A stranger to said defendant now (before.answer) claims, by a notice served, to be entitled to said money, and has forbidden any payment thereof by said bank to this plaintiff. Hence the bank asks for an order of interpleader, under section 820, Code Civil Proc. The plaintiff, the defendant, and said third party claimant all appeared by counsel on the motion, and such claimant also…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Baker v. New York National Exchange BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Clark v. . MosherNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Alexander v. . BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Anderson v. . ReillyNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
3Cited by4 opinions
- Schultz v. Teichman Engineering & Construction Co.New York Supreme Court · 1913
- Krugman v. Hanover Fire InsuranceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1902
- Marcus v. AufsesCity of New York Municipal Court · 1902
- In re Knoop's EstateNew York Surrogate's Court · 1890