D'Esterre v. City of New York
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of RTew York. Under chapter 118 of the Laws of 1892, amended by chapter 171 of the Laws of 1893, certain bonds' of the town of Gravesend were claimed to have been issued, amounting to $148,000, to Ooffin & Stanton, a firm of bankers or bond dealers, $24,000 of which were pledged to the complainant by Coffin & Stanton as security for a loan.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of RTew York. Under chapter 118 of the Laws of 1892, amended by chapter 171 of the Laws of 1893, certain bonds' of the town of Gravesend were claimed to have been issued, amounting to $148,000, to Ooffin & Stanton, a firm of bankers or bond dealers, $24,000 of which were pledged to the complainant by Coffin & Stanton as security for a loan. The validity of these bonds being disputed, the complainant brought this action in equity, substantially to determine the validity of the bonds.
1Opinion of the Court
WALLACE, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal by the defendants from a decree for the complainant in a suit in equity establishing the validity of certain bonds created by the former town of Graves-end, directing the registration of the bonds by the defendant the comptroller of the city of New York, and adjudging that the city of New York pay the accrued interest upon the bonds in accordance with their terms.
March 10, 1892, the legislature of the state of New York passed an act (chapter 118,' Laws 1892) entitled “An act in relation to local improvements, in the town of Gravesend, in the county of…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Von Hoffman v. City of QuincySupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Mount Pleasant v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Townsend v. LittleSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Mobile v. WatsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Ralls County Court v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Divide Creek Irr. Dist. v. HollingsworthCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
- In Re East Bay Etc. Water Bonds of 1925California Supreme Court · 1925
- City of Chester v. Commonwealth, Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Driskel v. O'ConnorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Poor District Case (No. 2)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.