Legal Opinion

Weidenfeld v. Pacific Imp. Co.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided July 21, 1930No. 282PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judge.

This is an action to recover $709,953.17, and interest, alleged to have been collected by defendant for plaintiff’s use in 1895, no part of which had ever been paid, though payment was duly demanded. The defenses are payment, the statute of limitations, and set-off to the extent of the claim of a greater sum due defendant from plaintiff. The case really turns on the sufficiency of the proof of the defense of payment. At the close of the ease the defendant moved for the direction of a verdict in its favor on the ground that payment of the sum sought to be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. A. B. Small Co. v. Lamborn & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. McGuire v. BlountSupreme Court of the United States · 1905

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Wonnacott v. Denver & Rio Grande Western R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
  2. Sanders v. Schenley Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  3. Feamster v. Southern Railway Co.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1969
  4. Dr. Gerald R. Finkel v. Allstate Electric Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2020
  5. Syrup Associates, Inc. v. Coastal Development Massachusetts, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API