Legal Opinion

Mesnick v. Hempstead Bank

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1980PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

John S. Lockman, J.

Upon the foregoing papers it is ordered that this motion by defendant Hempstead Bank to dismiss the first cause of action upon the ground that it is barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations is granted. (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 5.)

In November of 1977, plaintiff opened a checking account with defendant bank in the name of Linda Mesnick Agency. During the next 18 months or so a total of approximately $60,000 was deposited into the account and paid out by checks. The account was closed on May 9, 1979. Plaintiff contends that the signatures upon the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Critten v. Chemical National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. McIsaac v. Bank of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  3. Lorentz v. LezetteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1967

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Woods v. MONY Legacy Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
  2. Five Towns College v. CitibankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  3. Robinson Motor Xpress, Inc. v. HSBC Bank, USAAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  4. Stowell v. Cloquet Co-Op Credit UnionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  5. DECATUR FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. LitskyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API