Legal Opinion

Kasnowitz v. Manufacturers Trust Co.

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided October 11, 1939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSchackno, J.

Plaintiffs move to strike out the second affirmative defense in the defendant’s amended answer as insufficient in law. The facts and nature of the action are stated in the opinion of this court considering the sufficiency of the defendant’s original answer. (Kasnowitz v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 171 Misc. 545.) There it was stated that “ If there will be a double recovery, an unjust enrichment will result which is susceptible of a legal remedy.” Defendant’s amended answer now pleads the transaction between plaintiffs and their contractor, Hope Bag, Inc., the delivery of the checks against…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fowler v. . Bowery Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. American Defense Society, Inc. v. Sherman National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  3. Kasnowitz v. Manufacturers Trust Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1939
  4. Schoen v. Security BankNew York Supreme Court · 1913

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re the Accounting of GlennNew York Surrogate's Court · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API