Legal Opinion
Thurm v. Schupper
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 30, 1960PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.
A judgment, as yet unpaid, has heretofore been duly entered in the plaintiff’s favor and against the defendant Sidney Schupper, sometimes hereinafter referred to as Sidney S. Schupper. The plaintiff now moves before me, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, that summary judgment be awarded bim against the defendant Chase Manhattan Bank. The facts of the case, as disclosed in the papers, are as follows:
The plaintiff is the agent in New York of one Samuel Schupper of Chile. He brings this action as the assignee of Samuel Schupper and also of one Carl Wolf of The Netherlands.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Graves v. . the American Exchange BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Morgan v. United States Mortgage & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Cohen v. Lincoln Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Natl. Bank of CommerceNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Frederic A. Potts & Co. v. Lafayette National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1935
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fergang v. FlanaganNew York Supreme Court · 1997