Legal Opinion
Muller v. Kling
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 2, 1912PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Submission of a controversy upon an agreed statement of facts, pursuant to section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
1Opinion of the Court
Miller, J.:
On May 9, 1898, the firm of Scholtz, Sanchez & Co. drew the following draft:
“No. 1233. New York, May 9th, 1898.
“ No. 45305 ne varietur.
“ Exchange for Fres. 35,000.
“At sixty days after sight of this first of exchange (Second not paid) pay to the order of Messrs. Muller, Schall & Co. the sum of thirty-five thousand francs. Value received which place.to account as advised.
“SCHOLTZ, SANCHEZ & CO. “(de N. & 0. ie.)
“To Messrs. Demachy & F. Seilliere, Paris.
“Rue de Provence 58.”
*178And on May 10, 1898, in the city of New York, sold it to the plaintiffs, the payees, and received therefor the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fourth Street Bank of Philadelphia v. YardleySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Brill v. . TuttleNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Coolidge v. PaysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Boyce & Henry v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Vail v. . FosterNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dreiser v. John Lane Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
- In Re T. N. Wilson, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1938
- Liberty National Bank & Trust Co. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- A. L. Gosselin Corp. v. Mario Tapparelli fu Pietro of America, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
- Mayor, Lane & Co. v. Charles I. Weinstein Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1914