Custer v. Tompkins County Bank
9 Pa. 27
This text of 9 Pa. 27 (Custer v. Tompkins County Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Custer v. Tompkins County Bank, 9 Pa. 27 (Pa. 1848).
Opinion
This cause is ruled by The Bank of Pittsburgh v. Whitehead. The rule laid down there, is, that notice to a corporator is not notice to the corporation, unless he were constituted an organ of communication between it and those who deal with it. The corporator, in this case, was not such an organ, and the evidence was properly rejected.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Joseph A. Puleo & Sons, Inc. v. Borough Council
298 A.2d 658 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1973)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
9 Pa. 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/custer-v-tompkins-county-bank-pa-1848.