Legal Opinion

Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp. v. Lazard-Godchaux Co. of America, Inc.

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

Decided November 30, 1923PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McAvoy, J.:

Plaintiff moved for summary judgment under section 476 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, upon the resolution of June 3,1922, of defendant’s board of directors which it is claimed admits that the defendant company, The Lazard-Godchaux Company of America, Inc., became liable as the drawer of two drafts which are the subject of the action. The balance due on the drafts amounts to over $49,000 with interest. Each of the two drafts is the subject-matter of a cause of action contained in the complaint. The drafts are in identical terms and (except for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Amsinck v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
  2. Lee v. GraubardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  3. McAndrew v. . RadwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
  4. Helburn-Thompson Co. v. All Americas Mercantile Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Schlesinger v. SchroederWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Commonwealth Fuel Co. v. Powpit Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  3. Bastian Brothers Co. v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Buffalo General Hospital v. SuppaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
  5. Biggers v. Bank of RinggoldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API