Legal Opinion
Transbel Inv. Co. v. Roth
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 31, 1940PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLANCY, District Judge.
This is an action on a note made and payable in Florida. The plaintiff moves to strike out two defenses which set up the ownership and control of the plaintiff corporation by a Florida lawyer and the purchase of the note by plaintiff corporation with the purpose of bringing suit thereon and a third which pleads that the note prospectively requires compound interest, all of these defenses being intended to show that the prosecution of this action is forbidden by several public policies of the State of New York and that, therefore, the note is unenforcible in this Court.
Th…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Young v. . HillNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Newburger-Morris Co. v. . TalcottNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Union Trust Co. v. GrosmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Williamsburgh Savings Bank v. Town of SolonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Fairchild Hiller Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
- In Re James and Dianne Ripley, Debtors. United States of America v. James and Dianne RipleyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
- In Re American Fuel & Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- American Hemisphere Marine Agencies, Inc. v. KreisNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Kredietbank, N v. v. ESIC Capital Corp. (In Re Rosner)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.