Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. McKey

102 F. 662, 42 C.C.A. 583, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4589
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedJune 21, 1900
DocketNo. 610
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 102 F. 662 (Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. McKey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. McKey, 102 F. 662, 42 C.C.A. 583, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4589 (7th Cir. 1900).

Opinion

BEIi CURIAM.

The decision below was contrary to the principles enunciated by this court in the case of Oil Co. v. Hawkins, 46 U. S. App. 115, 20 C. C. A. 468, 74 Fed. 305. It was not necessary that the bank should have offered to surrender the note in its possession to (lie trustee, or should hare brought it into court for cancellation. The clerk will certify to the district court direction to set aside the orders sustaining exceptions to the1 report of the referee and dismissing the petition, and to enter an order granting the relief prayed for. There shall be no recovery of costs in either court.

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

Related

Chassen v. United States
207 F.2d 83 (Second Circuit, 1954)
United Fruit Co. v. United States
186 F.2d 890 (First Circuit, 1951)
In re Swift
111 F. 503 (D. Massachusetts, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 F. 662, 42 C.C.A. 583, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-nat-bank-of-chicago-v-mckey-ca7-1900.