Legal Opinion

Buxhoeveden v. Estonian State Bank

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

Decided December 30, 1942PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In our opinion (1) this is an action at law for money had and received by respondent bank to the use of the plaintiff's assignor; (2) the papers upon which the warrant of attachment was granted are sufficient in law to warrant the granting thereof; and (3) Johannes Kaiv, Acting Consul General, had full authority on behalf of the defendant to make the motion to vacate the warrant, and Messrs. Kirlin, Campbell, Hiclcox, Keating & McGrann had full authority to make said motion on behalf of respondents. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., ‘concur.

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Buxhoeveden v. Estonian State BankNew York Supreme Court · 1943
  2. In re the Estate of FaisalNew York Surrogate's Court · 1960
  3. Roe v. DoeNew York Supreme Court · 1972