Rimes & Stubbs v. National Bank of Savannah

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rimes & Stubbs v. National Bank of Savannah

101 S.E. 315, 24 Ga. App. 479, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 868

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 19, 1919

Docket10657

StatusPublished

This text of 101 S.E. 315 (Rimes & Stubbs v. National Bank of Savannah) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rimes & Stubbs v. National Bank of Savannah, 101 S.E. 315, 24 Ga. App. 479, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 868 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, J.

'Where a person by accident or mistake sends certain checks or money for deposit to a bank with which he has never opened an account as a depositor, and there is no agreement between him and the bank creating the relation of depositor and banker, and he draws cheeks thereon which the bank fails to pay, he cannot maintain a suit for damages against the bank. In order to create such relationship the minds of the parties must meet; and without this there is no obligation on the part of the bank to honor checks signed by the person making such deposits. Even though the bank actually received the money, it would not be liable for damages for failing to honor such checks, but [480]*480would be liable only as a bailee, for the money so deposited. The court therefore did not err in granting a nonsuit.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Action for damages; from city court of Savannah—Judge Rourke. March 20, 1919.

J. P. Dulces, Columbus E. Alexander, for plaintiffs. Edward 8. Elliott, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Smith, J.

'Where a person by accident or mistake sends certain checks or money for deposit to a bank with which he has never opened an account as a depositor, and there is no agreement between him and the bank creating the relation of depositor and banker, and he draws cheeks thereon which the bank fails to pay, he cannot maintain a suit for damages against the bank. In order to create such relationship the minds of the parties must meet; and without this there is no obligation on the part of the bank to honor checks signed by the person making such deposits. Even though the bank actually received the money, it would not be liable for damages for failing to honor such checks, but [480]*480would be liable only as a bailee, for the money so deposited. The court therefore did not err in granting a nonsuit.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Action for damages; from city court of Savannah—Judge Rourke. March 20, 1919.

J. P. Dulces, Columbus E. Alexander, for plaintiffs. Edward 8. Elliott, for defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 S.E. 315, 24 Ga. App. 479, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 868, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rimes-stubbs-v-national-bank-of-savannah-gactapp-1919.