Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Serzysko v. Chase Manhattan Bank

409 F.2d 1360

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1969-05-20
Topic
general

PER CURIAM.: We affirm in all respects the judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York for the reasons stated in the thorough and well reasoned opinion of Judge Graven reported at 290 F.Supp. 74 (S.D.N.Y.1968).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Serzysko v. Chase Manhattan Bank. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
10 opinions
SERZYSKO v. CHASE MANHATTAN BANK,409 F.2d 1360(2nd Cir. 1969)
Edward SERZYSKO, Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee, v. The CHASE MANHATTAN
BANK, Defendant-Respondent-Appellant.
Nos. 531, 532, Dockets 33096, 33097.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued April 22, 1969.
Decided May 20, 1969.
Appeal, and cross-appeal, from a judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, Graven, J., dismissing plaintiff's complaint for damages sustained by reason of defendant having made loans to plaintiff in violation of Federal Reserve Board Regulation U, and dismissing defendant's counterclaim for the unpaid balance of the indebtedness incurred by plaintiff on the loans.
Arthur C. Fink, New York City (Fink, Weinberger Levin, New York City, and Walter Talmont, Hempstead, N.Y., on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant-appellee.

A. Donald MacKinnon, New York City (Milbank, Tweed, Hadley McCloy and Adlai S. Hardin, Jr., New York City, on the brief), for defendant-respondent-appellant.
Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, ANDERSON, Circuit Judge, and WYATT, District Judge.fn*
PER CURIAM:
We affirm in all respects the judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York for the reasons stated in the thorough and well reasoned opinion of Judge Graven reported at290 F. Supp. 74(S.D.N.Y. 1968).
  1. Sitting by designation. ↩