Dod v. Fourth National Bank

New York Supreme Court

Dod v. Fourth National Bank

59 Barb. 265, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedApril 4, 1871

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 Barb. 265 (Dod v. Fourth National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dod v. Fourth National Bank, 59 Barb. 265, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Gourt, Cardozo, J.

I think the evidence given by the defendants would not have justified a verdict that they had parted with any money upon the faith of the draft which had been sent to them for collection, even if, which they did not, they had asked the circuit judge to submit that question to the jury. I know that the cashier swears generally to having advanced on this and other drafts; but I think when all his evidence is considered, it is wholly unsatisfactory to support such a theory as that any specific loan was made on the faith of this draft. That being so, the case-falls within the authority of Lindauer v. Fourth National Bank, (55 Barb. 75,) and the ruling below should be sustained.

I am not in favor of extending Dickerson v. Wason, (54 Barb. 230,) to any case which does not fall precisely within the facts of that decision.

The exceptions should be overruled, and judgment ordered for the plaintiffs upon the verdict, with costs.

Judgment for the plaintiffs.

Ingraham, P. J., and Cardozo and Geo. G. Barnard, Justices.]

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

By the Gourt, Cardozo, J.

I think the evidence given by the defendants would not have justified a verdict that they had parted with any money upon the faith of the draft which had been sent to them for collection, even if, which they did not, they had asked the circuit judge to submit that question to the jury. I know that the cashier swears generally to having advanced on this and other drafts; but I think when all his evidence is considered, it is wholly unsatisfactory to support such a theory as that any specific loan was made on the faith of this draft. That being so, the case-falls within the authority of Lindauer v. Fourth National Bank, (55 Barb. 75,) and the ruling below should be sustained.

I am not in favor of extending Dickerson v. Wason, (54 Barb. 230,) to any case which does not fall precisely within the facts of that decision.

The exceptions should be overruled, and judgment ordered for the plaintiffs upon the verdict, with costs.

Judgment for the plaintiffs.

Ingraham, P. J., and Cardozo and Geo. G. Barnard, Justices.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 Barb. 265, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dod-v-fourth-national-bank-nysupct-1871.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack