Legal Opinion
Mexico v. Munzer
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 29, 1946PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPecora, J.
Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to rule 106 of the Buies, of Civil Practice on the ground that it does not set forth sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action. It is alleged in the complaint that defendant’s agent in Toluca, Mexico, drew a draft on October 9, 1943, in the slim of $2,569.11 against a corporation in New York City, and discounted said draft with plaintiff bank at its office maintained in Toluca, Mexico; that plaintiff forwarded the draft, by mail, to its correspondent in New York for collection; that the draft was lost in the mails before arriving in New…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Heinrich v. First National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Shipsey v. . Bowery National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Richard v. Connecticut Electric Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Goeske v. TaylorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
- Richard v. . the Connecticut Electric Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
3Cited by2 opinions
- Banco del Estado de Mexico, S. A. v. LyonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
- Fraioli v. KalbAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961