Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 New York opinions name it 5 courts 1894–2013 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Inland Mortgage Capital Corp. v. Realty Equities NM, LLCgreen2 sentences2013Capital Corp. v Realty Equities NM, LLC, 71 AD3d 1089, 1090 [2010]; Milliken & Co. v Stewart, 182 AD2d 385, 387 [1992]). 2013Capital Corp. v Realty Equities NM, LLC, 71 AD3d 1089, 1090 [2010]; Milliken & Co. v Stewart, 182 AD2d 385, 387 [1992]). | 2 | 2 |
Milliken & Co. v. Stewartgreen2 sentences2013Capital Corp. v Realty Equities NM, LLC, 71 AD3d 1089, 1090 [2010]; Milliken & Co. v Stewart, 182 AD2d 385, 387 [1992]). 2013Capital Corp. v Realty Equities NM, LLC, 71 AD3d 1089, 1090 [2010]; Milliken & Co. v Stewart, 182 AD2d 385, 387 [1992]). | 2 | 2 |
Bank of Suffolk County v. Kitegreen2 sentences2013As an initial matter, pursuant to the rider to the mortgage agreement, Fiduciary validly “waive [d] the right to interpose any defense, setoff, counterclaim or crossclaim of any nature or description” (Bank of Suffolk County v Kite, 49 NY2d 827, 828 [1980]; see Inland Mtge. 2013As an initial matter, pursuant to the rider to the mortgage agreement, Fiduciary validly “waive [d] the right to interpose any defense, setoff, counterclaim or crossclaim of any nature or description” (Bank of Suffolk County v Kite, 49 NY2d 827, 828 [1980]; see Inland Mtge. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Citibank, N. A. v. Plapinger
green
2 sentences2011Citibank v Plapinger, 66 NY2d 90 [1985]), except where precluded by considerations of public policy (see e.g. 2008Such language is sufficiently specific to constitute a valid waiver of the right to plead defenses (see Citibank v Plapinger, 66 NY2d 90 [1985]; Raven El. | 2 | 2008–2011 |
Fassnacht v. Hartman
green
1 sentence1980The allegedly unexpressed condition to the promissory note — that defendants, despite their having signed as makers of the note, were not to be held personally liable — was clearly inconsistent with not only the unqualified form of this negotiable instrument, but with its explicit waiver of "the right to interpose any defense, set-off or counterclaim whatsoever” as well (see Fleck v Bank of Suffolk County, 67 AD2d 676, 677 ; Meadow Brook Nat. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Meadow Brook National Bank v. Bzura
green
1 sentence1980Bank v. Bzura, 20 AD2d 287, 290 ). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Peri v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
green
1 sentence1930Co., 152 N. Y. 521 ; Matter of Cartier v. Spooner, 118 App. Div. 342 ), and the party proceeded against has the right to interpose any defense available to him in an equitable action. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Cartier v. William
neutral
1 sentence1930Co., 152 N. Y. 521 ; Matter of Cartier v. Spooner, 118 App. Div. 342 ), and the party proceeded against has the right to interpose any defense available to him in an equitable action. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Arnold v. . Angell
green
1 sentence1894Arnold v. Angell, 62 N. Y. 508 ; Heyman v. Schmidt, (Com. | 1 | 1894–1894 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.