Legal Opinion

Van der Veen v. Amsterdamsche Bank

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 1942PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.

This is a motion by plaintiff for summary judgment. The plaintiff concedes that defendant’s version of the facts is correct, and takes the position that on the basis of those facts he is entitled to summary judgment.

In April, 1940, the sum of 142,500 was deposited with Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. in New York for the plaintiff’s account, plaintiff then residing in Amsterdam, Holland. This- money represented the proceeds of a Pennsylvania estate inherited by the plaintiff. One-half of this money was transmitted to the plaintiff at once and the remaining $21,250, which is the subject of this…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Sokoloff v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
  2. Sokoloff v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. Werfel v. Zivnostenska BankaNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
  4. Matter of Banque De France v. Supreme CourtNew York Court of Appeals · 1942
  5. Werfel v. Zivnostenska BankaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of KahnNew York Surrogate's Court · 1942
  2. In re the Estate of HirschNew York Surrogate's Court · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API