Levy v. Franklin Savings Bank

117 Mass. 448, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 261
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedApril 1, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 117 Mass. 448 (Levy v. Franklin Savings 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.

Bluebook
Levy v. Franklin Savings Bank, 117 Mass. 448, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 261 (Mass. 1875).

Opinion

Morton, J.

The plaintiff contends that the sole object of the by-law is to protect the bank against the risk of mistake as to the personal identity of its depositors, and therefore that it does not apply to a case where there has been no mistake as to identity, but the bank has paid upon a forged order purporting to be signed by the depositor. This argument would be very strong, perhaps conclusive, if this by-law had not contained the last clause. It would then have been the same, with only immaterial verbal changes, as the by-law considered in the case of Jochumsen v. Suffolk Savings Bank, 3 Allen, 87, cited by the plaintiff. But the added provision, that “ in all cases a payment upon presentation of a deposit book shall be a discharge to the corporation for the amount so paid,” enlarges the by-law, and extends its operation to other cases than those in which there is a mistake as to the identity of the depositor. Unless it has this effect, it is without force and useless. The bank is obliged to deal with a very large number of depositors, most of whom must be strangers to its officers. They are unable to identify the persons of the depositors, and it is equally impossible that they should know their handwriting. The danger of fraud, by payments upon forged orders accompanied by the book, may be as great as by payments to persons who falsely personate the depositor and present the book. In either case, we think the purpose of the by-law was to authorize the bank to rely upon the presentation of the book as its security against fraud.

In the case at bar therefore a majority of the court is of opinion that if the bank, using reasonable care, in good faith, paid [451]*451the whole or a part of the plaintiff’s deposit upon the presentation of his book, it is a case provided for by the by-law, and the corporation is discharged to the amount so paid.

Exceptions sustained.

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

Related

Polonsky v. Union Federal Savings & Loan Association
138 N.E.2d 115 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1956)
Polonsky v. Union Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
11 Mass. App. Dec. 112 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1956)
Wasilauskas v. Brookline Savings Bank
156 N.E. 34 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1927)
Stebbins v. North Adams Trust Co.
136 N.E. 880 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1922)
Bulakowski v. Philadelphia Saving Fund Society
113 A. 553 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Langdale v. Citizens Bank
69 L.R.A. 341 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Kingsley v. Whitman Savings Bank
65 N.E. 161 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
Ladd v. Augusta Savings Bank
58 L.R.A. 288 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1902)
McCarthy v. Provident Institution for Savings
34 N.E. 1073 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1893)
Gifford v. Rutland Savings Bank
63 Vt. 108 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1890)
Kimins v. Boston Five Cents Savings Bank
6 N.E. 242 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1886)
Pierce v. Boston Five Cents Savings Bank
129 Mass. 425 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1880)
Donlan v. Provident Institution for Savings
127 Mass. 183 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1879)
Goldrick v. Bristol County Savings Bank
123 Mass. 320 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
117 Mass. 448, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-franklin-savings-bank-mass-1875.