Under the circumstances of this case, plaintiff-appellant Smith Barney, as drawer, has a clear contractual and statutory right to payment from defendant-respondent Citibank, as drawee bank. The affirmative defenses pleaded by Citibank and the cross claims of the third-party defendant depositary banks are legally insufficient to defeat Smith Barney's contractual and statutory rights. Accordingly, appellant's motion for summary judgment should have been granted. (See
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & CO., INC. v. CITIBANK
162 A.D.2d 108 (1990)
Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Incorporated, Appellant, v. Citibank (Delaware), Respondent and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Banco Popular De Puerto Rico et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
June 5, 1990
June 5, 1990
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
