TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Northern Bank

In re NORTHERN BANK OF NEW YORK In re CITY OF NEW YORK

In re Northern Bank, 148 N.Y.S. 70 (1914)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
June 5, 1914
Docket
No. 5957
Citations
148 N.Y.S. 7085 Misc. 594163 A.D. 9741914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6868
Disposition
Affirmed.
Cited by 5
Headnotes
1. Municipal Corporations (§ 255%, New, vol. 4 Key-No. Series)—Governmental Powers and Functions—Right to Preference for Debt. Where a city had funds, derived from taxes, water rents, assessments, etc., on deposit with an insolvent bank, it was not entitled to preference in payment over other depositors and creditors by virtue of its public character, since, the money having already been received by the corporation, it belonged, not to the people of the state, but to the corporation as a separate entity acting for its own purposes, and not a subdivision of the state. 2. Municipal Coepobations (§ 53*)—Political Status—Relation to State. Except when a city is acting in a purely governmental capacity, it is not a mere subdivision of the state and not a sovereign power. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Municipal Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 141, 143; Dec. Dig. § 53.*] 3. Municipal Coepobations (§ 1*)—Natuee and Status. Municipal corporations are independent corporate entities created by the state, not only for governmental purposes, but also to do acts not governmental in their scope, though they be for the common good of the inhabitants. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Municipal Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 1, 1%; Dec. Dig. § 1* For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, vol. 5, pp. 4620-4627; vol. 8, p. 7726.]
Summary
In the matter of the Northern Bank of New York. Motion by the City of New York for the preferential payment of its deposit. Motion denied, and the city appeals.

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

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements on the opinion of Mr. Justice Lehman at Special Term. Order filed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1915: 11917: 11936: 21941: 119152026peak 1936 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Edmonson v. Walker137 Tenn. 569 (1917)
  2. City of New York v. Goldstein84 F.2d 982 (2d Cir. 1936)
  3. Mixter v. Mohawk Clothing Co.155 N.Y.S. 647 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1915)
  4. In re Lazaroff84 F.2d 982 (2d Cir. 1936)
  5. City of New York v. Feiring118 F.2d 329 (2d Cir. 1941) · Dissent

Most recent

  1. City of New York v. Feiring118 F.2d 329 (2d Cir. 1941) · Dissent
  2. In re Lazaroff84 F.2d 982 (2d Cir. 1936)
  3. City of New York v. Goldstein84 F.2d 982 (2d Cir. 1936)
  4. Edmonson v. Walker137 Tenn. 569 (1917)
  5. Mixter v. Mohawk Clothing Co.155 N.Y.S. 647 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1915)

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