From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Buxhoeveden v. Estonian State Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 30, 1942
265 App. Div. 966 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)

Opinion

December 30, 1942.


Appeal by plaintiff from an order (1) granting motion of the respondent Estonian State Bank and Johannes Kaiv, Acting Estonian Consul General, appearing specially, to vacate the warrant of attachment herein and the levies made thereunder; and (2) denying plaintiff's cross-motion to strike out the appearance of Messrs. Kirlin, Campbell, Hickox, Keating McGrann as attorneys for respondent Estonian State Bank and said Johannes Kaiv, without prejudice. Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and respondents' motion and appellant's cross-motion denied, without costs. In our opinion (1) this is an action at law for money had and received by respondent bank to the use of the plaintiff's assignor; (2) the papers upon which the warrant of attachment was granted are sufficient in law to warrant the granting thereof; and (3) Johannes Kaiv, Acting Consul General, had full authority on behalf of the defendant to make the motion to vacate the warrant, and Messrs. Kirlin, Campbell, Hickox, Keating McGrann had full authority to make said motion on behalf of respondents. Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Buxhoeveden v. Estonian State Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 30, 1942
265 App. Div. 966 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)
Case details for

Buxhoeveden v. Estonian State Bank

Case Details

Full title:ANATOLE BUXHOEVEDEN, Appellant, v. ESTONIAN STATE BANK et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 30, 1942

Citations

265 App. Div. 966 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)