Graham v. Orange County National Bank
This text of 35 A. 1053 (Graham v. Orange County National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered by
The case upon which the court below directed a verdict for the plaintiff was this: Graham, the defendant in the suit, had made a note, payable to and endorsed by G. W. Murray, which was discounted by the plaintiff. At the time the note was-thus discounted, Murray, the payee of the note, was president of the plaintiff corporation, and, together with its cashier, constituted the discount committee. The defence was that Murray knew that the note was given to raise funds for an illegal purpose and that his knowledge was imputable to the bank. The law upon the subject of imputable knowledge is laid down by this court in the case [226]*226of Willard v. Denise, 5 Dick. Ch. Rep. 482. In the caso before us Murray did not act at all for the bank. His conduct was actuated wholly by personal reasons, and if lie knew that he was taking part in an unlawful transaction the bank cannot be charged by his guilty participation.
This disposes of the only error assigned. The judgment will be affirmed.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Depue, Garrison, Gummere, Lippincott, Ludlow, Magie, Yan Syckel, jBarkalow, Bogert, Dayton, Hendrickson, Nixon. 14.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
35 A. 1053, 59 N.J.L. 225, 30 Vroom 225, 1896 N.J. LEXIS 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-orange-county-national-bank-nj-1896.