Wool Growers Service Corp. v. Simcoe Sheep Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Dissent
I concur with the majority as far as they go. However, I think the evidence is more than sufficient to hold the Federal Intermediate Credit Bank to an accounting — at least to the extent of all Simcoe funds received by it and applied on Ragan Dunnett's obligations. The correspondence in the Olney deal was sufficient to arouse its curiosity as to how Simcoe's assets were being handled. It was obvious even then that Simcoe and its assets were being used largely, if not solely, to buttress the financial positions of Wool Growers and Ragan Dunnett with the bank. And, when the financial statement…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Russell v. . McCallNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Penn v. FoglerIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Goodwin v. American Surety Co. of New YorkWashington Supreme Court · 1937
3Cited by1 opinion
- Wool Growers Service Corp. v. Simcoe Sheep Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1943