Case Name: The Northern Bank of New York et al., Appellants, v. Washington Savings Bank, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1917-05-15
Citations: 221 N.Y. 505
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Northern Bank of New York et al., Appellants, v. Washington Savings Bank, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 221
Pages: 505–505

Head Matter:
The Northern Bank of New York et al., Appellants, v. Washington Savings Bank, Respondent.
(Submitted April 26, 1917;
decided May 15, 1917.).
Northern Bank of N. Y. v. Washington Savings Bank, 172 App. Div. 341, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 1, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term. This controversy affects the ownership of twenty-seven bonds and mortgages or the proceeds of their collection. In December, 1910, when the superintendent of banks took possession of the plaintiffs and the defendant, these bonds and mortgages with minor exceptions were found in the possession of the plaintiff, Northern Bank of New York. The record title to these bonds and mortgages, however, was in the defendant, Washington Savings Bank, from whose possession they had been removed.' The record title was vested in the Washington Savings Bank by virtue of four separate assignments covering respectively fourteen mortgages, one mortgage, eight mortgages and four mortgages. This action was commenced by the plaintiffs to declare these assignments invalid anda cloud upon the title of the plaintiffs. The defendant counterclaimed for the possession of the bonds and mortgages and an adjudication that it was the proper owner. Decision was rendered against the plaintiff dismissing the complaint upon the merits and in favor of the defendant sustaining the counterclaim.
Henry H. Abbott, George W. Morgan and Edward A. Craighill, Jr., for appellants.
Samuel S. Koenig, Oliver L. Goldsmith and Milton M. Sittenfield for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscook, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Not sitting: Cardozo and McLaughlin, JJ.