Rounsavel v. Scholfield

20 F. Cas. 1262, 2 D.C. 139, 2 Cranch 139

This text of 20 F. Cas. 1262 (Rounsavel v. Scholfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rounsavel v. Scholfield, 20 F. Cas. 1262, 2 D.C. 139, 2 Cranch 139 (circtddc 1817).

Opinion

Whereupon

the Qourt

(Thruston, J., absent,)

upon the motion of the defendant’s counsel, instructed the jury that if they should be satisfied by the evidence that the plaintiff, when he received the check, knew that the cashier of the Merchants Bank had no right to transfer it, he could not recover in this suit, and that if the plaintiff, when he took the check, knew that it had been dishonored by the bank on which it was drawn, he took it liable to all the equitable and legal defence which the defendant then had against the Merchants Bank.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 F. Cas. 1262, 2 D.C. 139, 2 Cranch 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rounsavel-v-scholfield-circtddc-1817.