Legal Opinion
B. W. Dyer & Co. v. Monitz, Wallack & Colodney
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 8, 1959PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Abramham 1ST. (teller, J.
This is an action for an accounting with respect to a shipment of Formosan sugar which was pledged by the American importer allegedly without authority and subsequently sold by the pledgee to recover the advances made thereon. Plaintiff’s assignor, the Taiwan Sugar Corporation (“ Taiwan ”) is a Taiwan corporation engaged in the manufacture, export and sale of sugar. Defendant Skrod & Co., Inc., a domestic corporation, entered into a contract with Taiwan dated July 24, 1953 for the purchase of “ sugars covered by this contract, to remain in effect for the years 1954…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Schoonmaker v. . HoytNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Magee v. . BadgerNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co. v. SapowitchNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- J. B. Kepner Co. v. HuttonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
- The J.B. Kepner Company v. . HuttonNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
3Cited by4 opinions
- Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing, L.P. v. Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee of Bayou Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing, L.P. v. Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee of Bayou Group, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- First National Bank v. Fazzari, New York County Courts1959
- Reguera v. CalderonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1967