Legal Opinion
Chemical Bank v. Haskell
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 9, 1980PublishedCited by 95 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Wachtler, J.
The issue on this appeal is whether the plaintiff Chemical Bank of Rochester (Chemical) acquired the status of a holder in due course as to several notes executed by defendants Paddy Chayefsky, John Haskell, Halsey F. Sherwood and Arthur Giliotti. The trial court held in these three related cases, that Chemical was a holder in due course and in that capacity took the notes free of all defenses raised by the makers. The Appellate Division reversed, based on its conclusion that Chemical did not act in good faith in purchasing the notes. Chemical appeals.
In 1972…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hall v. Bank of BlasdellNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
3Cited by95 opinions
- Nick's Garage, Inc. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. v. Citibank, N. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Silverman v. Actrade Capital, Inc. (In Re Actrade Financial Technologies Ltd.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- First International Bank of Israel, Ltd. v. L. Blankstein & Son, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. American Express Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.