Scribd
Upload
27 views2 pages

National Boulevard Bank of Chicago v. Meyer Schwartz, 274 F.2d 823, 2d Cir. (1960)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's granting of summary judgment to the plaintiff-bank in its action to recover $25,000 paid over a stop payment order. The bank sued the defendant for the amount of a check it erroneously paid after receiving a stop payment order. The Court of Appeals affirmed based on the opinion issued by the district court judge.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
27 views2 pages

National Boulevard Bank of Chicago v. Meyer Schwartz, 274 F.2d 823, 2d Cir. (1960)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's granting of summary judgment to the plaintiff-bank in its action to recover $25,000 paid over a stop payment order. The bank sued the defendant for the amount of a check it erroneously paid after receiving a stop payment order. The Court of Appeals affirmed based on the opinion issued by the district court judge.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

274 F.

2d 823

NATIONAL BOULEVARD BANK OF CHICAGO, PlaintiffAppellee,


v.
Meyer SCHWARTZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 177.
Docket 25856.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.


Argued February 3 and 4, 1960.
Decided February 26, 1960.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York; Archie O. Dawson, Judge.

Defendant appeals from a summary judgment granted to plaintiff-bank in an


action for the recovery of $25,000, the amount of a check erroneously paid over
a "stop payment" order.

Kenneth S. Oltarsh, New York City (Virginia C. Duncombe and Duncombe,


Oltarsh & Schott, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.

Hyman Fried, New York City (Abbie Goldstein and Fried, Beck, Tannenbaum
& Field, New York City, N. Y., and Edward R. Schwartz of the Bar of District
of Columbia, on the brief), for defendant-appellant.

Before MEDINA and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges, and MADDEN, Judge,


United States Court of Claims.*

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Dawson, 175 F.Supp. 74.

Notes:

Notes:
*

Sitting by designation

You might also like