Shiel v. Stoneham
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment rendered against him in favor of defendants on their counterclaim in the Municipal Court of the city of ¡New York, borough of the Bronx, second district.
1ConcurrenceBijub, J.
I concur for reversal of the judgment which in effect sustained defendants’ counterclaim, on the ground that it sufficiently appears that defendants did not “ keep at all times on hand or under their control either the particular shares purchased for their customer or an equal amount *129of other shares of the same kind and have them in such a situation that the customer on paying the amount due him thereon could at any time obtain them.” Taussig v. Hart, 58 N. Y. 425, 429; Helm v. Ennis, 109 App. Div. 42, 44; Caswell v. Putnam, 120 N. Y. 153; Dos Passes Stock B. (2d ed.) 257. The fact, if it be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Taussig v. . HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Caswell v. . PutnamNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Helm v. EnnisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905