Peck v. First Nat. Bank

43 F. 357, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 1669
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided May 22, 1890·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wallace, J.

At the time when the Fidelity Bank received the draft belonging to the plaintiffs for collection, the hank was, according to the agreed statement of facts, “hopelessly and irretrievably insolvent, as was known to E. L. Harper, the vice-president of the Fidelity Bank, who was then the managing officer of the business of the hank.” - The bank failed the same day, or the next morning, and never resumed business. Under these circumstances, it was a fraud upon the plaintiffs, on the part of the bank, to acquire their property upon the faith of its apparent prosperity, without disclosing the real situation. The Fidelity Bank, [358] therefore, did not acquire any title to the draft, or its proceeds. Railroad Co. v. Johnston, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 890. The restrictive indorsement upon the draft was notice to the defendant that the Fidelity Bank was merely an agent for the plaintiffs to collect the proceeds, consequently the defendant did not acquire any better title to the draft, or its proceeds, than the Fidelity Bank had. Judgment is ordered for the plaintiffs.

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

Peck v. First Nat. Bank, 43 F. 357, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 1669 (circtsdny 1890).

43 F. 357 (Peck v. First Nat. Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wasson v. Hawkins
59 F. 233 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana, 1894)