Legal Opinion

Brown v. Rosenbaum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 19, 1940PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The judgment should be reversed because no identified shares of stock were allocated to the defendant’s contract of purchase until after the failure of the Harriman National Bank and Trust Company. (Broderick v. Aaron [Rice], 264 N. Y. 368; Broderick v. Adamson [Greif], 270 id. 260.) We have concluded, however, to order a new trial rather than to dismiss the complaint for the reason that this question may not have been sufficiently raised and adequately litigated at the trial. (See Persky v. Bank of America National Association, 261 N. Y. 212.)

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Persky v. Bank of America National Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
  2. Broderick v. AaronNew York Court of Appeals · 1934

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lichtenstein v. Montefiore Hospital & Medical CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
  2. Brown v. RosenbaumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941
  3. Brown v. RosenbaumNew York Supreme Court · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API