Legal Opinion

Lawrence-Cedarhurst Bank v. Ruth

New York County Courts

Decided February 25, 1937PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

The action is on a promissory note, being a demand note, made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The complaint shows that the note was secured by certain collateral which has been sold upon due notice to the defendant, the proceeds credited to the note, and that judgment is sought for the balance of the note remaining after such credit.

This is admitted by the defendant in his answer, who, however, interposes a separate defense alleging in substance that the note ■and securities were given by him to the bank under an express agreement that they were to constitute a deposit to guarantee the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mount Vernon Trust Co. v. BergoffNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  2. Higgins v. . RidgwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
  3. People ex rel. Rice v. GravesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  4. People Ex Rel. Rice v. GravesNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  5. Bay Parkway National Bank v. ShalomNew York Court of Appeals · 1936

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. La Salle Co. v. KaneDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1949
  2. City Trust & Savings Bank v. SchwartzOhio Court of Appeals · 1940
  3. Keane v. Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer ResearchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API