Legal Opinion
Chelsea Exchange Bank v. First United Presbyterian Church
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided March 15, 1915PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Action against the defendant church as maker, and the individual defendants as indorsors, of a promissory note.
1Opinion of the CourtRansom, J.
The plaintiff bank is entitled to judgment against the defendant church for the amount of its note with interest, but is not entitled to judgment against the individual defendants as indorsers thereon. The face of the note in suit is as follows:
“ $1750.00/100 August 19, 1914.
“ Thirty days after date we promise to pay to the order of ourselves Seventeen Hundred and fifty 00/100 Dollars at Chelsea Exchange Bank, 34th St. near 8th Ave. Value received.
“ First United Presbyterian Church,
“ 16 West 108th St.
“ Pre.s. John Elliott.
“ Treas. Edward A. Shea.
“No. 41846 Due 9/18.”
On the back of the note…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Olcott v. . Tioga Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Randall v. Van VechtenNew York Supreme Court · 1821
- Falk v. MoebsSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Carpenter v. FarnsworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Liebscher v. KrausWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Charles Nelson Co. v. MortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Dormont Savings & Trust Co. v. KommerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- First National Bank of Salem v. JacobsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1920
- Kennedy & Parsons Co. v. Lander Dairy & Produce Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1927
- Brown v. Indian River Orange Lands, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1938