Legal Opinion · Dissent

Barnhard v. Barnhard

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

Decided January 15, 1992Published

1DissentMiller, J.

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to MHT, the party opposing the motion for summary judgment, I find triable issues of fact requiring resolution at trial. Specifically, the circumstances of the subject transaction, including the parties’ banking agreement, present issues of fact as to the apparent authority of Ivan Barnhard to negotiate the check without inquiry by the bank into the authenticity of *717the indorsement thereon (see generally, Greene v Hellman, 51 NY2d 197; Chemical Bank v Haskell, 51 NY2d 85; Ford v Unity Hosp., 32 NY2d 464). If it is determined that the offending…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Greene v. HellmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Ford v. Unity HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
  3. Chemical Bank v. HaskellNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Ottinger v. DempseyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API