Legal Opinion
Royal Exchange Assurance v. Brownell
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 21, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
The plaintiff, Royal Exchange Assurance, a British corporation, brings this action under the Trading With the Enemy Act1 to recover $6,184,640.54 vested by the Alien Property Custodian as property of the Deutsches Kalisyndikat (hereafter called “Syndicate”), a German corporation.
The essence of the plaintiff’s claim is that as trustee for bondholders under certain deeds of trust executed by the Syndicate it had an interest, right or title in the funds at the time of vesting and the funds should therefore be paid over to it as trustee for the benefit of the bondholders.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Elias Siegelman, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Eva Siegelman, Deceased v. Cunard White Star LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Wilson v. . Lewiston Mill Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Leo Walton v. Arabian American Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Shannon v. Irving Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Alley v. ClarkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1947
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Royal Exchange Assurance, Trustee v. William P. Rogers, Attorney General of the United States, Successor to the Alien Property CustodianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- Royal Exchange Assurance, Trustee v. William P. Rogers, Attorney General of the United States, Successor to the Alien Property CustodianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- Royal Exchange Assurance, Trustee v. William P. Rogers, Attorney General of the United States, Successor to the Alien Property CustodianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958