From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LeBovici v. Jamaica Savings Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 23, 1982
434 N.E.2d 1332 (N.Y. 1982)

Opinion

Submitted February 9, 1982

Decided March 23, 1982

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, MARTIN RODELL, J.

Ronald LeBovici, pro se, and Louis Schaeffer for Ronald LeBovici and another, appellants.

Jerry J. Limoncelli for respondent.

Leopold S. Rassnick, William P. Tucker, Steven E. Grill, John P. Cuddahy and Joseph E. Kaht for Savings Bank Association of New York State, amicus curiae.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Petitioners agreed that their deposit would only "be payable at maturity", and in exchange for petitioners' commitment of their funds for a fixed period of time the bank agreed to pay a higher rate of interest than is applicable to savings accounts where withdrawal is permitted upon demand. This agreement was not illusory nor was it rendered illusory by the inclusion of the following provision: "If withdrawal is permitted prior to maturity on Time Savings Accounts, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation regulations require as a minimum penalty" a specified amount. Petitioners are mistaken in their belief that this creates an illusory promise because the bank promised "to permit petitioners to withdraw their money at an earlier date, if the * * * bank permitted early withdrawals". Actually this provision simply specified the consequences of an early withdrawal should the parties subsequently agree to modify or terminate the agreement in this manner. As the agreement itself indicates these are consequences imposed by Federal law (12 C.F.R. § 329.4 [f]) and the provision does little more than inform the petitioners of them.

Nor may the petitioners seek to estop the bank from enforcing its contractual right to withhold payment until maturity. The statements made by the bank's officer regarding past practices did not represent a promise or "implied consent" to permit early withdrawal in the future as petitioners contend.

We have considered petitioners' other arguments and have found them to be without merit.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

LeBovici v. Jamaica Savings Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 23, 1982
434 N.E.2d 1332 (N.Y. 1982)
Case details for

LeBovici v. Jamaica Savings Bank

Case Details

Full title:RONALD S. LeBOVICI et al., Appellants, v. JAMAICA SAVINGS BANK, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 23, 1982

Citations

434 N.E.2d 1332 (N.Y. 1982)
434 N.E.2d 1332
449 N.Y.S.2d 954

Citing Cases

Ayala v. Jamaica Savings Bank

Inasmuch as plaintiff's allegations fail to state a cause of action for securities fraud, the first and…

Royal Mortg. Corp. v. F.D.I.C.

Courts in New York have rejected similar efforts to circumvent the parol evidence rule by claiming estoppel.…