Legal Opinion

United States v. Commercial Bank of North America

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided September 4, 1962PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CROAKE, District Judge.

Defendant moves under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., to add Ameco Electronic Corporation and one David Needleman as parties defendant.

In this action the United States sues the Commercial Bank of North America to recover funds deposited in the defendant bank by the plaintiff pursuant to an agreement of deposit known as a Special Account Contract. The funds were deposited in this account for the purpose of making progress payments to Ameco for work done under a contract of manufacture between Ameco and the United States. Ameco also signed…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Illinois Central Railroad v. State Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  3. Nassau Smelting & Refining Works, Ltd. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  4. Petrogradsky Mejdunarodny Kommerchesky Bank v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  5. Truncale v. Universal Pictures Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1949

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Halladay v. VerschoorCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
  2. 6247 Atlas Corp. v. Marine InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
  3. State Ex Rel. Blond v. StubbsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
  4. Guthrie v. Bio-Medical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1983
  5. United States v. HanselDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1998

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

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

Powered by the Exa API