conflicting claim in New York

2019"When state law prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim, the analysis is straightforward: The conflicting rule is displaced by the FAA" ( AT & T Mobility LLC v Concepcion , 563 US 333 , 341).

2015“As this Court reaffirmed last Term, ‘[w]hen state law prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim, the analysis is straightforward: The conflicting rule is displaced by the FAA.’AT & T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. —, —, 131 S.Ct. 1740 , 1747, 179 L.Ed.2d 742 (2011).

2020Preston v. Ferrer, 552 U.S. 346,353 , 128 S.Ct. 978 , 169 L.Ed.2d 917 (2008)." (AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 ,341 [2011]).

2020Preston v. Ferrer, 552 U.S. 346,353 , 128 S.Ct. 978 , 169 L.Ed.2d 917 (2008)." (AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 ,341 [2011]).

2007The most prominent of the four decisions cited in this regard is Petrogradsky Mejdunarodny Kommerchesky Bank v National City Bank of N.Y. ( 253 NY 23 [1930], cert denied 282 US 878 [1930]), in which Chief Judge Cardozo wrote: “The possibility of adverse claims does not relieve the defendant [bank] from liability when sued in an action at law by a depositor who is successful in proving a title to the fund” ( 253 NY at 38 ).

2007The most prominent of the four decisions cited in this regard is Petrogradsky Mejdunarodny Kommerchesky Bank v National City Bank of N.Y. ( 253 NY 23 [1930], cert denied 282 US 878 [1930]), in which Chief Judge Cardozo wrote: “The possibility of adverse claims does not relieve the defendant [bank] from liability when sued in an action at law by a depositor who is successful in proving a title to the fund” ( 253 NY at 38 ).

2007The most prominent of the four decisions cited in this regard is Petrogradsky Mejdunarodny Kommerchesky Bank v National City Bank of N.Y. ( 253 NY 23 [1930], cert denied 282 US 878 [1930]), in which Chief Judge Cardozo wrote: “The possibility of adverse claims does not relieve the defendant [bank] from liability when sued in an action at law by a depositor who is successful in proving a title to the fund” ( 253 NY at 38 ).

1992Nonetheless, in the absence of common domicile "the law of the place of the tort will normally apply, unless displacing it' "will advance” the relevant substantive law purposes without impairing the smooth working of the multi-state system or producing great uncertainty for litigants’ ” (Schultz v Boy Scouts, supra, at 201, quoting Neumeier v Kuehner, 31 NY2d 121, 128 , supra; see also, LaForge v Normandin, 158 AD2d 990 ).

1975The rule that an execution creditor will lose his priority if he permits his execution to become dormant, does not apply where the delay in enforcing the execution does not result from the judgment creditor’s conduct (6 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 5234.11; cf. McCarthy v Farley, 149 Misc 360 ; Knower v Barnard, 5 Hill 377 ).

1959(Rozell v. Rozell, 281 N. Y. 106,112 , supra.) The decisions in various jurisdictions dealing with actions for negligent injuries between parent and child are well summarized in the American Law Reports (60 A. L.

1959(Cannon v. Cannon, supra.) This view has not been adopted by all States, however (Wells v. Wells, 48 S. W. 2d 109 [Mo.]), and our own Court of Appeals has acknowledged the existence of a conflicting principle of common law that for every wrong there shall be a remedy.

1901Such was the rule laid down in the case of Faile v. Crawford, 30 App. Div. 536 , 52 N. Y.

1901Such was the rule laid down in the case of Faile v. Crawford, 30 App. Div. 536 , 52 N. Y.

1887(Risley v. Phœnix Bank, 83 N. Y., 318 .) And, as has been observed, no business can be conducted without hazard; the plaintiff, in the payment out of the money of its depositors upon their cheeks, takes a risk of the forgery of the check either in the maker’s signature or in the filling in of the amount; in its transactions with its customers it runs a risk that the indorsements of commercial paper may also be forged, and it get no title, and therefore, the courts seem to have inclined to the rule that a more pretext of a conflicting claim is not enough to show that the plaintiff is in any dan

1887In the case of the Baltimore & Ohio Railway Company v. Arthur ( 90 N. Y., 234 ), it was held that the plaintiff, in an action of interpleader, must show that there is some question, as between the claimants to be tried, and that he will incur hazard in paying to either.

1861In the case of The Brooklyn Central Rail Road Company v. The Brooklyn City Rail Road Company, ( 32 Barb. 358 ,) which was cited by the plaintiffs’ counsel, we simply held that the defendants had, as a part of their franchise, an exclusive right to use a track which they had constructed for the propulsion of cars and the carriage therein of passengers for hire.