Bank of the United States v. Davis

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Bank of the United States v. Davis

2 F. Cas. 692, 4 Cranch 533, 4 D.C. 533

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedMarch 15, 1835

StatusPublished

This text of 2 F. Cas. 692 (Bank of the United States v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of the United States v. Davis, 2 F. Cas. 692, 4 Cranch 533, 4 D.C. 533 (circtddc 1835).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT

(nem. con.) was of opinion that the indorsement was virtually to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs then offered in evidence a notice signed by the Baltimore notary-public addressed to Mr. Richard Smith, the last indorser, upon the back of which was an indorsement to this effect: “A similar notice delivered to Richard Davis by me, John S. Nevius, January 2d, 1833,” and proved that Nevius is dead. That on the said 2d of January, 1833, he was what is called a note-clerk in the bank, and occasionally delivered notices of this kind; but they were more generally given by other officers, called messengers.

The defendant’s counsel objected that such memorandums are not evidence unless made by a person whose usual business is to do what he certifies he has done.

But THE COURT (nem. con.) permitted it to be read in evidence to the jury.

Verdict for the plaintiffs, $2,298.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THE COURT

(nem. con.) was of opinion that the indorsement was virtually to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs then offered in evidence a notice signed by the Baltimore notary-public addressed to Mr. Richard Smith, the last indorser, upon the back of which was an indorsement to this effect: “A similar notice delivered to Richard Davis by me, John S. Nevius, January 2d, 1833,” and proved that Nevius is dead. That on the said 2d of January, 1833, he was what is called a note-clerk in the bank, and occasionally delivered notices of this kind; but they were more generally given by other officers, called messengers.

The defendant’s counsel objected that such memorandums are not evidence unless made by a person whose usual business is to do what he certifies he has done.

But THE COURT (nem. con.) permitted it to be read in evidence to the jury.

Verdict for the plaintiffs, $2,298.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 F. Cas. 692, 4 Cranch 533, 4 D.C. 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-the-united-states-v-davis-circtddc-1835.