Ingraham v. President of Maine Bank
This text of 13 Mass. 208 (Ingraham v. President of Maine Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The money demanded in this action cannot be recovered, if, by means of the misconduct of Hale, for whose faithful conduct the plaintiff and his co-sureties were responsible, happening after the execution of their bond, the defendants have been damnified to the extent of the sum explained. Now, although a deficit existed, equal to this sum, before the execution of this bond, and which may have been covered by an antecedent bond; yet, the fact proved, that Hale took money from the vaults, without the knowledge of the directors, and repaid it to those of whom he had borrowed it, was a breach of the condition of his bond. For the money, when placed in the vaults, became the property of the defendants ; and the transaction cannot be distinguished from an actual payment from his own funds to supply the defalcation, and a removal afterwards of the funds of the bank without the consent of the defendants.
Plaintiff nonsuit.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
13 Mass. 208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingraham-v-president-of-maine-bank-mass-1816.