Legal Opinion

Tinker National Bank v. Grassi

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1968PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

John P. Cohalan, Jr., J.

This action was tried before the court without a jury.

Plaintiff bank sued defendant, as maker, for defaulting on a 90-day promissory note for $3,000, dated March 13,1964. In his *887answer, defendant, by failing to deny, has admitted the debt. He does deny, however, that he owes the additional sum of $450, sued for, which represents an attorney’s fee of 15%; and claims that it is unconscionable and void as against public policy.

The note, as signed by defendant, reads in pertinent part that ‘ ‘ Each maker * * * agrees that if any attorney is used to enforce or collect this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bobrick v. Second National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
  2. In re the Bank of United StatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
  3. Bobrick v. . the Second National Bank of HobokenNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
  4. Franklin National Bank v. CapobiancoNew York Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Silberstein v. MurdochAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dziurak v. Chase Manhattan BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
  2. Jamaica Savings Bank v. HalimiCivil Court of the City of New York · 1974
  3. Vellaringattu v. CasoNassau County District Court · 1989
  4. In re the Estate of HollingerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API