Legal Opinion
Feist v. Fifth Avenue Bank
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 11, 1939PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLoughran, J.
This case having been submitted on agreed facts pursuant to sections 546-548 of the Civil Practice Act, the Appellate Division was without power to draw inferences of fact. The question presented is whether the judgment correctly defines the effect of the stated facts as matter of law, not whether there was any evidence upon which supporting findings could have been made. (Lafrinz v. Whitney, 233 N. Y. 107, 110; Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Mortgage Commission, 271 N. Y. 302.)
The appellant bank is the trustee under an agreement of trust made with it by Leo Feist on October 4, 1924. This…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- King v. . TalbotNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Marx v. . BroganNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Lafrinz v. . WhitneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Mortgage CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
3Cited by14 opinions
- Penthouse Properties, Inc. v. 1158 Fifth Avenue, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
- Manhattan Storage & Warehouse Co. v. Movers & Warehousemen's Ass'n of Greater New York, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Cohen v. Manufacturers Safe Deposit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Thomas McCaffrey Jr. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- Town of Pelham v. City of Mount VernonNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.