American Exchange National Bank v. Goubert
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 1, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the .court at a Trial Term, a jury having been waived. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The undertaking is a binding and obligatory agreement.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 1, 1912, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the .court at a Trial Term, a jury having been waived. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The undertaking is a binding and obligatory agreement. (Goodwin v. Bunzl, 102 N. Y. 224; Ryan v. Webb, 39 Hun, 435; Toles v. Adee, 84 N. Y. 222; Decker v. Judson, 16 N. Y. 439.) The undertaking created an absolute and independent obligation upon the part of…
1Opinion of the CourtCabdozo, J.
The defendants have given to the plaintiff, The American Exchange National Bank, a bond of indemnity which we are called upon to construe.
The bank held a note for $2,800, which was secured by stock of the Goubert Manufacturing Company. The defendant Goubert, in whose name the shares stood, was not a party to the note, nor indebted to the bank. He brought an action against the bank to recover possession of the certificate of stock, upon a claim that as against him the bank held it without right. He moved in that action for an injunction restraining the.bank from disposing of the stock until…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. . MollesonNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- People v. . LeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Sonneborn v. . LibbeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- American Exchange National Bank v. GoubertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Elmendorf v. LansingNew York Supreme Court · 1826
3Cited by7 opinions
- DeCastro v. DeCastroMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
- City of Wichita v. Home Cab Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1940
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Graff v. EpsteinMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
- Thompson v. TopsoeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.