Legal Opinion
Curtis v. Thomson
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 22, 1937PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.
This is an action for an accounting by a customer against a stockbroker. The issue of whether the plaintiff is entitled to an accounting need not be considered. A full accounting was rendered at the trial, and the question to be decided is whether upon such accounting the customer is entitled to recover anything from the broker.
*872Isabel D. Curtis, the plaintiff, who is now eighty-nine years old, opened an account with a predecessor firm of stockbrokers about 1906. From that time until June 1, 1929, when the defendant firm was organized, there were a number of successor firms containing some…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Kent v. . Quicksilver Mining Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Harriss v. TamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. RennSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Porges v. United States Mortgage & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Mayer v. . MonzoNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jacobs v. National Bank of Far RockawayNew York Supreme Court · 1939
- Curtis v. ThomsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938