Legal Opinion

Manhattan Taxi Service Corp. v. Mogul Finance Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 11, 1931PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHammer, J.

Twenty-three taxicabs were sold under a conditional sales agreement by the Checker Cab Manufacturing Corporation, manufacturer, to the plaintiff vendee. Notes bearing indorsements of some of plaintiff’s stockholders for the purchase price were also given by the vendee to the manufacturer.

The notes were thereafter duly indorsed and the agreement duly assigned by the manufacturer to the defendant, which advanced or financed the purchase price less charges. In July, 1924, a default in the payment of the notes by plaintiff occurred. Thereafter the twenty-three taxicabs came into possession either…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brady v. . CassidyNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
  2. Seeley v. Prentiss Tool & Supply Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  3. Seeley v. . Prentiss Tool and Supply CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
  4. Breakstone v. Buffalo Foundry & Machine Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
  5. McDougall v. . ShoemakerNew York Court of Appeals · 1923

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Associates Discount Corp. v. CommanderNew York District Court · 1963
  2. Lana v. International Harvester Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API