Legal Opinion

Abate v. Bushwigk Savings Bank

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided February 14, 1955PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.

Each of the three defendants separately moves, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against each moving defendant. The facts alleged in each cause of action are substantially the same.

Some years prior to September, 1948, one Mary Abate opened savings accounts with the respective defendants. In that month she changed them into joint accounts by adding the name of her son Dominick Abate (the plaintiff herein). Apparently she was illiterate and signed by fingerprints. She died on July *37423,1949. Soon thereafter said Dominick Abate…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Secor v. . SturgisNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  2. Loudon v. Taxing DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  3. Reilly v. . Sicilian Asphalt Paving Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1902
  4. Matter of DelaneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  5. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. First National Bank & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1939

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Meinrath v. Singer Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1980
  2. Rosenhack v. Chemical Bank & Trust Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API