Delano v. Case

12 N.E. 676, 121 Ill. 247
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJune 17, 1887
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 12 N.E. 676 (Delano v. Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Delano v. Case, 12 N.E. 676, 121 Ill. 247 (Ill. 1887).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scholfield

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was case, in the circuit court of Macoupin county, by a general depositor in a bank, against directors of the bank, for negligence in permitting it to be held out to the public as solvent, when in fact it was, at the time, insolvent. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff in that court, and that judgment was affirmed, on appeal to the Appellate Court for the Third District, and this appeal is from that judgment.

The Appellate Court, in its opinion filed on rendering that judgment, holds, first, that the directors of a bank are trustees for depositors as well as for stockholders; second, that they are bound to the observance of ordinary care and diligence, and are hence liable for injuries resulting from their nonobservance ; and third, that the present appellants did not observe that degree of care and diligence, and, in consequence thereof, appellee sustained the damages for which the judgment was rendered. Delano et al. v. Case, 17 Bradw. 531.

The last proposition we are relieved from inquiring into, since there was evidence tending (though, it may be, but slightly,) to sustain it.

The propositions of law, as above stated, are, in our opinion, free of objection and sustained by authority. Percy et al. v. Millandon, 3 La. 568 ; United Society of Shakers v. Underwood, 9 Bush, 609; Morse on Banks and Banking, (2d ed.) 133; Thompson on Liability of Officers and Agents, 395; Shea v. Mobry, 1 Lea, (Tenn.) 319; Hodges v. New England Screw Co. 1 R. I. 312; Wharton on Negligence, sec. 510.

The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Sheldon, C. J., and Craig, J., dissenting.

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

Related

Federal Deposit Insurance v. Bierman
2 F.3d 1424 (Seventh Circuit, 1993)
Albers v. Sullivan
5 N.E.2d 253 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1936)
Kelley v. Baggott
273 Ill. App. 580 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1933)
Winn v. Harby
172 S.E. 135 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1933)
Anderson v. Bundy
171 S.E. 501 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1933)
Paris v. Beckner
1930 OK 123 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1930)
Hunter v. Moss
151 S.E. 831 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
Fant v. Brissey
147 S.E. 632 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1929)
Daniels v. Berry
146 S.E. 420 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1929)
Webb v. Cash
250 P. 1 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1926)
Becker v. Billings
136 N.E. 581 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1922)
Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Munday
297 Ill. 555 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1921)
King v. Livingston Manufacturing Co.
68 So. 897 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1915)
Lyons v. Corder
162 S.W. 606 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1913)
Glass v. Courtright
14 Ohio N.P. (n.s.) 273 (Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division, 1913)
Ellis v. H. P. Gates Mercantile Co.
60 So. 649 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1912)
Hart v. Hanson
105 N.W. 942 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1905)
Sweet v. Montpelier Savings Bank & Trust Co.
77 P. 538 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1904)
Killen v. Barnes
82 N.W. 536 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 N.E. 676, 121 Ill. 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delano-v-case-ill-1887.