Drudge v. Peoples Wayne County Bank

Michigan Supreme Court

Drudge v. Peoples Wayne County Bank

251 N.W. 372, 265 Mich. 175, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 643

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 5, 1933

DocketDocket No. 16, Calendar No. 37,135.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 251 N.W. 372 (Drudge v. Peoples Wayne County Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Drudge v. Peoples Wayne County Bank, 251 N.W. 372, 265 Mich. 175, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 643 (Mich. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

McDonald, C. J.

This suit was brought to recover $500 which the plaintiff claims was wrongfully charged to his account in the defendant’s bank. The issue was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant has appealed.

The controversy had its origin in a transaction between the plaintiff and Dr. Olp, a dentist. The *176 plaintiff sold Olp a dental establishment and received his check for $500 as a down payment. The check was drawn on the Michigan-Griswold branch of defendant’s bank in which Olp had sufficient funds to meet it. The plaintiff carried a commercial account-in the Brewster-Hastings branch. In its main office the defendant maintained four tellers known as “branch tellers” who had charge of the business having to do with its several branches. The plaintiff presented the Olp check to one of these tellers for the purpose of having it cashed. He received $20 in cash and directed the balance to be deposited to his account according to a deposit slip on which the deposit was designated “currency.” On the following day the check reached the branch on which it was drawn, but a few hours before its arrival Dr. Olp served a stop payment order and withdrew his funds from the bank. The check was returned to the main office and on the theory that it had not been cashed but deposited for collection was charged to the plaintiff’s account. The plaintiff brought suit, basing his action on the claim that the check had been cashed and title thereto passed to the bank before payment was stopped. His theory was adopted by the trial court and judgment entered accordingly.

The question to be determined is whether the check was deposited for collection or as cash.

The preponderance of the evidence favors the plaintiff’s claim that he presented the check for the purpose of having* it cashed and that he so informed the teller; that the teller understood.it was' to be cashed and had actually counted out the money when the plaintiff informed him that he would take $20 and leave the balance on deposit. In view of these facts which are amply established by the evidence, it *177 must be held that the check was cashed and title passed to the bank before payment was stopped. The trial court correctly held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff.

Weadock, Potter, Sharpe, North, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred. Dead, J., did not sit.

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

McDonald, C. J.

This suit was brought to recover $500 which the plaintiff claims was wrongfully charged to his account in the defendant’s bank. The issue was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant has appealed.

The controversy had its origin in a transaction between the plaintiff and Dr. Olp, a dentist. The *176 plaintiff sold Olp a dental establishment and received his check for $500 as a down payment. The check was drawn on the Michigan-Griswold branch of defendant’s bank in which Olp had sufficient funds to meet it. The plaintiff carried a commercial account-in the Brewster-Hastings branch. In its main office the defendant maintained four tellers known as “branch tellers” who had charge of the business having to do with its several branches. The plaintiff presented the Olp check to one of these tellers for the purpose of having it cashed. He received $20 in cash and directed the balance to be deposited to his account according to a deposit slip on which the deposit was designated “currency.” On the following day the check reached the branch on which it was drawn, but a few hours before its arrival Dr. Olp served a stop payment order and withdrew his funds from the bank. The check was returned to the main office and on the theory that it had not been cashed but deposited for collection was charged to the plaintiff’s account. The plaintiff brought suit, basing his action on the claim that the check had been cashed and title thereto passed to the bank before payment was stopped. His theory was adopted by the trial court and judgment entered accordingly.

The question to be determined is whether the check was deposited for collection or as cash.

The preponderance of the evidence favors the plaintiff’s claim that he presented the check for the purpose of having* it cashed and that he so informed the teller; that the teller understood.it was' to be cashed and had actually counted out the money when the plaintiff informed him that he would take $20 and leave the balance on deposit. In view of these facts which are amply established by the evidence, it *177 must be held that the check was cashed and title passed to the bank before payment was stopped. The trial court correctly held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff.

Weadock, Potter, Sharpe, North, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred. Dead, J., did not sit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 N.W. 372, 265 Mich. 175, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drudge-v-peoples-wayne-county-bank-mich-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack