Legal Opinion
Erb v. Banco Di Napoli
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 25, 1926PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCrane, J.
The Appellate Division has certified that we should review the law in this case. The agreed statement of facts was submitted to the Municipal Court, which gave judgment for the plaintiff. The Appellate Term reversed that judgment and dismissed the complaint. The Appellate Division has reversed the Appellate «Term and sustained the Municipal Court. We have determined that the submitted facts do not go far enough to sustain the plaintiff’s claim, and that the complaint should be dismissed. I will state our reasons.
The Kingdom of Italy issued bonds which were negotiated or sold in the State of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Lawrence v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- &198tna National Bank v. . Fourth National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Baldwin's Bank of Penn Yan v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Crawford v. . West Side BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Kelly v. . RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Vladikavkazsky Railway Co. v. New York Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Austin-Nichols & Co. v. Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Sayer v. WynkoopNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Ehag Eisenbahnwerte Holding Aktiengesellschaft v. Banca Nationala a RomanieiNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of LofmarkNew York Surrogate's Court · 1928
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.