Legal Opinion
Dousmanis v. Colonial Bank
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided June 27, 1929PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBijur, J.
From the argument I drew the inference that opposing counsel were not interested in questions of practice which might arise on the appeal from plaintiff’s motion and defendant’s cross-motion, but desired a decision addressed to the law of the case.
In my opinion defendant was not a holder in due course if for no other reason than that the drawee can probably never be so regarded. (Brannan Neg. Inst. Law [1926 ed.], 618, and cases cited.) (See, also, 42 Harv. Law Rev. 412 [Jan. 1929] and notes; Woodward Quasi-Contracts, § 80.)
On the other hand, for the reasons given by me in K. & K. Silk…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- K. & K. Silk Trimming Co. v. Garfield National BankAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1923
3Cited by4 opinions
- Montano v. Springfield Gardens National BankAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1955
- Franklin Square National Bank v. Great Atlantic Building Material Supply Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1946
- National Commercial Bank & Trust Co. v. MadisonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
- Dousmanis v. Colonial BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930