TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Northern Bank of New York

In the Matter of the Northern Bank of New York, in Liquidation; In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Appellant, for an Order Directing the Superintendent of Banks of the State of New York, Respondent, to Pay Its Claim as a Preferred Claim

In re Northern Bank of N.Y., 106 N.E. 749 (N.Y. 1914)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 20, 1914
Citations
106 N.E. 749212 N.Y. 6081914 N.Y. LEXIS 995
Summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 5, 1914, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for an order directing the superintendent of banks of the state of New York to pay the claim of the city of New York against the Northern Bank of New York in full as a preferred claim. The following questions were certified: “ 1. Upon the facts stated in the moving papers, is the city of New York entitled to preference in the payment of the moneys on deposit in the Northern Bank of New York to its credit at the time it was taken charge of by the superintendent of banks for the purpose of liquidation ? 2. Is the city of New York in claiming such preference in the payment of such moneys on deposit in the Northern Bank of New York to its credit barred by the Statute of Limitations contained in section 19 of the Banking Law of the state of New York ? 3. Is the claim of the city of New York for such general preference barred by the order filed in the Supreme Court on December 6, 1911, affirming the report of Referee Ernest Hall, which denied the claim of the city of New York to a priority as to $6,818.21 based solely upon the allegation that such sum had been received by said bank after banking hours with the knowledge of the officers of said bank that it was not in a safe and solvent condition and had not been entered on the cash book of the city nor upon the books of the bank ? ”

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Order affirmed, with costs; first question certified answered in the negative; second and third questions certified not answered; no opinion.

Concur: Werner, Hisoock, Chase, Collin, Hogan and Miller, JJ. Taking no part: Cardozo, J.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →
1926: 11929: 11930: 21933: 11936: 41937: 11938: 21941: 219262026peak 1936 · 4

Most recent

  1. City of New York v. Feiring118 F.2d 329 (2d Cir. 1941) · Dissent
  2. In re David Brown Printing Co.32 N.E.2d 787 (N.Y. 1941)
  3. In re People, by Van Schaick254 A.D. 344 (1938)
  4. County of Nassau v. Lincer165 Misc. 909 (1938)
  5. In re The People251 A.D. 236 (1937)
  6. In re Atlas Television Co.6 N.E.2d 94 (N.Y. 1936)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list