Legal Opinion
Segal v. National City Bank
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 28, 1944PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSteinbrink, J.
This is a motion by the plaintiffs for summary judgment against the defendant National City Bank.
The action is to recover the sum of $10,000 paid by the National City Bank upon a check containing what is alleged to be the forged indorsement of the payee therein named. Plaintiffs are two of three copartners, doing business under the name of The Dominion Co. The third partner, Buth Trainer, refused to join in the action and has been named a party defendant. The National City Bank impleaded the Brooklyn Trust Company and the Modern Industrial Bank as parties defendant. Thereafter the Modern…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Shipman v. Bank of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Morgan v. United States Mortgage & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Seaboard National Bank v. Bank of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- National Surety Co. v. President & Directors of the Manhattan Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Natl. Bank of CommerceNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Segal v. National City BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
- Kallison v. Harris Trust & Savings BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1949