National City Bank v. Harbin Electric Joint-Stock Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
The main contention of the plaintiff in error is that, without the engineering corporation and Beardsley as parties, the action cannot be maintained, and that failure to make them parties cannot be excused by reason of the fact that they do not reside or do business within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States Court in China.
The general rule is that, where several persons make a déposit to their joint credit in a bank, the bank must have the signatures of all of them appended to a cheek against the fund, or take the risk of paying. Columbia…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Shields v. BarrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Hunt v. Rousmanier's AdministratorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Barney v. Baltimore CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Gregory v. StetsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Franz v. BuderCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1926
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Nordin v. ZimmerAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
- Boris v. MooreDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1957
- Jewett v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1965
- Clabbey v. First National BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959
- McDonnell v. Bank of ChinaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.