Legal Opinion

McIsaac v. Bank of New York

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

Decided February 20, 1980PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order and judgment unanimously reversed, with costs, defendant’s motion granted, and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: In awarding plaintiff summary judgment, Special Term erroneously found that "It was necessary for the drawee bank to demonstrate, to lay bare its proof that recovery by plaintiff on the check would constitute unjust enrichment.” The record adequately discloses sufficient proof to deny plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. A drawee bank stands in a debtor-creditor relationship to its customer and may make payment on checks drawn against its *718customer’s account only as…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Arrow Builders Supply Corp. v. Royal National Bank of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
  2. Sundail Construction Co. v. Liberty BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  3. Gotham-Vladimir Advertising, Inc. v. First National City BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1967
  4. Lynch v. First National Bank of Jersey CityNew York Court of Appeals · 1887

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Knight Publishing Co. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  2. Williams v. Upjohn Health Care Services, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  3. Mesnick v. Hempstead BankNew York Supreme Court · 1980
  4. American Heritage Bank and Trust Co. v. IsaacColorado Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. American Heritage Bank and Trust Co. v. IsaacColorado Court of Appeals · 1981

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API