Legal Opinion
Dougherty v. National City Bank
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 21, 1935PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Tweed (Harrison),
Referee. These are four actions to recover the unpaid balance of rubles in each of four deposit accounts opened with branches of the National City Bank in Petrograd and Moscow. These branches were closed in 1918. The primary theory on which the plaintiff seeks to recover is that while the deposits were originally payable at the Russian branches, nevertheless after the closing of these branches a deposit relationship existed between the depositor and the National City Bank as a whole and the deposits were *851thereafter payable on demand at the bank’s main office in New York; that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hutchison v. RossNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
- Dougherty v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Sokoloff v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
- Sokoloff v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Connecticut Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. WeadNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tillman v. National City Bank of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
- Ana Maria Edelmann v. The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Shaad v. Hutchinson's Boat Works, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1975
- Ngoc Quang Trinh v. Citibank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Ngoc Quang Trinh v. Citibank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988