Old Ninth Ward Homestead Co. v. Western German Bank

Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County

Old Ninth Ward Homestead Co. v. Western German Bank

3 Ohio N.P. 106

CourtCourt of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County

DecidedJuly 1, 1896

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Ohio N.P. 106 (Old Ninth Ward Homestead Co. v. Western German Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Old Ninth Ward Homestead Co. v. Western German Bank, 3 Ohio N.P. 106 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

This case involves substantially the same facts as the Bnrnet-Woods Building & Savings Co. v. German National Bank, and the same conclusion is reached in it. Schrader perpetrated a similar fraud on the plaintiff, obtained the check drawn on the defendant, and cashed it at the German National Bank. That bank sent it through the clearing house, and the defendant paid it. The circumstances were even more aggravated, in that the check on its face indicates that it was a loan to the payee who was fictitious. The check was payable, not to order, but to the party named, and the defendant had recourse against the German National Bank, but this is immaterial, as it seems to me, for the disability attached to the check in its inception, and any one who was deceived by.it, could defend on the ground of negligence.

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

This case involves substantially the same facts as the Bnrnet-Woods Building & Savings Co. v. German National Bank, and the same conclusion is reached in it. Schrader perpetrated a similar fraud on the plaintiff, obtained the check drawn on the defendant, and cashed it at the German National Bank. That bank sent it through the clearing house, and the defendant paid it. The circumstances were even more aggravated, in that the check on its face indicates that it was a loan to the payee who was fictitious. The check was payable, not to order, but to the party named, and the defendant had recourse against the German National Bank, but this is immaterial, as it seems to me, for the disability attached to the check in its inception, and any one who was deceived by.it, could defend on the ground of negligence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Ohio N.P. 106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/old-ninth-ward-homestead-co-v-western-german-bank-ohctcomplhamilt-1896.