Dickey v. Franklin Bank
32 Me. 572
Opinion
orally.—The cashier had no author^ to receive the note for the bank, except by allowing it on the note A. This was not done, and it never became the property of the bank. The bank had the note in possession ; claimed to own it, and attempted to apply it to their own benefit by a set-off against a debt due from themselves. This constituted a conversion. Judgment for plaintiff.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dickey v. Franklin Bank, 32 Me. 572 (Me. 1851).
32 Me. 572 (Dickey v. Franklin Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.