Norwalk Bank v. Adams Exp. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut
This was an action originally brought in a court of the state, and removed by the defendants into this court The case came on for trial before NELSON and SHIPMAN, JJ., and a jury. The facts were as follows: In December, 1859, F. A. Williams, of the city of New York, sent from that city a promissory note, payable three months after date, for $3.000, to the Norwalk Bank, at Norwalk, Connecticut, to be discounted.
Read the full summary
This was an action originally brought in a court of the state, and removed by the defendants into this court The case came on for trial before NELSON and SHIPMAN, JJ., and a jury. The facts were as follows: In December, 1859, F. A. Williams, of the city of New York, sent from that city a promissory note, payable three months after date, for $3.000, to the Norwalk Bank, at Norwalk, Connecticut, to be discounted. The cashier returned the note to Williams through the mail, with a letter, stating that the note had too long to run, and that, if he would make it a two months’ note, the bank would…
1Opinion of the Court
NELSON, Circuit Justice,
after the evidence was in, and the counsel for the plaintiffs had stated the grounds upon which they relied for a recovery, said:
We are of opinion, that the question involved in this case is wholly a question of law, as there is no dispute as to the facts.
It is agreed, at least the facts warrant the ■conclusion, that both of these parties, the hank and the carrier, are innocent parties, so far as regards this transaction — equally innocent, perhaps; and the question is, which of the two innocent parties must suffer the loss. This will depend upon the application of the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Pacific Express Co. v. HertzbergCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897