Legal Opinion
Balee v. Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. 4
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 13, 1930PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, J.
From so much of an order as granted the motion of plaintiff to strike out from the answer the second separate defense as insufficient in law, defendant appeals.
The order must be reversed and the motion to strike out denied.
The assignor of plaintiff, one Elkins, under a contract with defendant, a water improvement district of Hidalgo county, Tex., paid $4,000 to the defendant in Texas at the time of the making of an agreement to purchase and receive at Little Rock, Ark., $450,000 of a municipal note issue. This sum was to be applied by the defendant to a deferred payment to become due under…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hall v. CordellSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Wester v. . Casein Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Graham v. First National Bank of NorfolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
3Cited by3 opinions
- Industrial Export & Import Corp. v. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Industrial Export & Import Corp. v. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1947
- Denihan v. Finn-Iffland & Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1932