Legal Opinion
Tudor Development Group, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 22, 1992No. 91-5773PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
COWEN, Circuit Judge.
At issue in this case is which party is entitled to a fund of $594,000 paid into the district court. To settle this dispute we must determine whether a bank which has honored a letter of credit may be equitably subrogated to the rights of its customer vis-a-vis funds paid to the customer by a party unrelated to the original letter of credit. We conclude that because the issuing bank was satisfying its own primary liability rather than the liability of another when it made payment under the letter of credit, it may not avail itself of the common-law…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- United States v. Munsey Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Carter v. RaffertyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Willing v. MazzoconeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Clark v. Pennsylvania State PoliceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Gladowski v. FelczakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- First Commonwealth Bank v. HellerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- JPMorgan Chase Bank v. CookDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- Tudor Development Group, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- Mead Corp. v. Dixon Paper Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.