Southwick v. First National Bank of Memphis (1881)
green
· 131 citation events
across 25 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
190019632026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Menendez v. Saks And Company (1973)
The importers' contractual obligation to pay the owners, which had its situs in New York, must not be confused with the interventors' quasi-contractual obligation to return the payments mistakenly made later to them, which arose only after the funds had been received or used by the interventors, Banco Do Brasil v. Madison Steamship Corp., 61 Misc.2d 1028 , 307 N.Y.S.2d 341 (1970), and a demand had been made by the importers for their return, Southwick v. First National City …
green
Menendez v. Saks (1973)
The importers’ contractual obligation to pay the owners, which had its situs in New York, must not be confused with the interventors’ quasi-contractual obligation to return the payments mistakenly made later to them, which arose only after the funds had been received or used by the interventors, Banco Do Brasil v. Madison Steamship Corp., 61 Misc.2d 1028 , 307 N.Y.S.2d 341 (1970), and a demand had been made by the importers for their return, Southwick v. First National City …
green
American Mills Co. v. Hoffman (1921)
“If a party can allege one cause of action and then recover upon another, his complaint will serve no useful purpose, but rather to ensnare and mislead his adversary.” Brightson v. Claflin Co., 180 N. Y. 76, 81 , 72 N. E. 920, 921 ; Southwick v. First National Bank of Memphis, 84 N. Y. 420, 428, 429 .
green
Ray v. United Traction Co. (1904)
Bank of Memphis, 84 N. Y. 420 ; Reed v. McConnell, 133 id. 425, 434 .) It is true that evidence tending to show that the plaintiff was not allowed to ride on the car and carry the cage with her came into the case without objection, but it came in as part of the transaction between herself and the conductor ; it could not properly have been excluded, and all of it was properly in" as tending to show a justification for a forcible exclusion, from the car had the plaintiff give…
green
Block v. Third Avenue Railroad (1901)
(Southwick v. First National Bank, 84 N. Y. 420, 429 ; Dexter v. Ivins, 133 id. 551, 552 ; Zoller v. Kellogg, 66 Hun, 194 .) If the facts proved had constituted merely an immaterial variance from those alleged in the complaint, no exception could have been taken to what was done, but the change in the complaint went further than to correct an immaterial variance.
green
Hutchinson v. President & Directors of Manhattan Co. (1894)
Bank v. State, 141 N. Y. 379 , 36 N. E. 316 , nor in Justh v. Bank, 56 N. Y. 478 , Stephens v. Board, 79 N. Y. 183, 187 , and Southwick v. Bank, 84 N. Y. 420, 436, 437 , which sustains the defendant’s contention that it had the right arbitrarily to credit the plaintiff’s money on1 the past-due obligations of W.
Bank, 84 N. Y. 420, 436, 437 , which sustains the defendant’s contention that it had the right arbitrarily to credit the plaintiff’s money on the past due obligations of W.
green
Grinnell v. Sherman (1891)
Rathbun v. Ingals, 7 Wend. 320 ; Southwick v. Bank, 84 N. Y. 420, 433, 434 .
See, also, Southwick v. First National Bank of Memphis, 84 N. Y. 420, 428 ; McNeil v. Cobb, 186 App. Div. 177 ; affd., 230 N. Y. 536 .) As to the other check for $5,000 dated July 7,1939, and allegedly delivered to appellant within a few hours of decedent’s death, we are of the view that the evidence would support a finding that there was no consideration for this check.