
    Harry Bykowsky, Respondent, v. The Public National Bank of New York, Appellant.
    (Argued January 22, 1925;
    decided February 25, 1925.)
    
      Limitation of actions — action to recover money paid defendant who agreed to transmit same abroad and open bank account in favor of plaintiff — when not barred by Statute of Limitations.
    
    
      Bykowsky v. Public Nat. Bank of N. Y., 209 App. Div. 61, affirmed.
    Appeal from an order "of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 2, 1924, which affirmed an order of ..Special Term denying defendant’s motion for a dismissal of the complaint. The complaint sets forth that on the 17th day of July, 1917, the defendant represented to the plaintiff that it was in a position, and agreed, to open a savings account with the Imperial Savings Bank in the city of Moscow, Russia, in behalf of plaintiff, and that it would procure and deliver to the plaintiff a bank book of such account; that upon such representations and promises the plaintiff paid to the defendant the sum of $2,115, but that in violation of said agreement the defendant has failed to open said account and has failed to deliver the bank book, by reason whereof this plaintiff was damaged in the sum of $2,115. This suit was commenced August 22, 1923, more than six years after plaintiff paid defendant the money sought to be recovered.
    The following question was certified: “ Was the cause of action alleged in the complaint begun within the time limited by law for the commencement of the action.”
    
      Sam L. Cohen and Henry L. Moses for appellant.
    
      William S. O’Connor and Joseph G. Wiman for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion..

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., • Cardozo, Pound, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ. Absent: McLaughlin, J.  