From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. United States Trust Company of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 24, 1892
31 N.E. 625 (N.Y. 1892)

Summary

In Williams v. United States Trust Co., 133 N.Y. 660, 31 N.E. 29, the contract of pledge contained a clause providing for a payment on account, or the deposit of additional approved security, in the event of the depreciation in the market value of the securities pledged.

Summary of this case from Dunbar v. Commercial Electrical Supply Co.

Opinion

Argued April 29, 1892

Decided May 24, 1892

John R. Dos Passos for appellant.

Joseph H. Choate and Edward W. Sheldon for respondent.



EARL, Ch. J. reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Williams v. United States Trust Company of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 24, 1892
31 N.E. 625 (N.Y. 1892)

In Williams v. United States Trust Co., 133 N.Y. 660, 31 N.E. 29, the contract of pledge contained a clause providing for a payment on account, or the deposit of additional approved security, in the event of the depreciation in the market value of the securities pledged.

Summary of this case from Dunbar v. Commercial Electrical Supply Co.

In Williams v. Stern it was held that there was no evidence of a waiver by the defendant of a right to resort to the security.

Summary of this case from Toplitz v. Bauer
Case details for

Williams v. United States Trust Company of New York

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM S. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v . THE UNITED STATES TRUST COMPANY of New…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 24, 1892

Citations

31 N.E. 625 (N.Y. 1892)
31 N.E. 625
45 N.Y. St. Rptr. 232

Citing Cases

Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Lazenby

But says the learned judge in the Sherman Case: "It is competent for * * * the contract to stipulate that the…

Toplitz v. Bauer

The right to redeem the pledge at common law was one that could be cut off in no other way. The effect of a…