Legal Opinion

United States v. Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, United States of America v. Security-First National Bank

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided December 28, 1959No. 16165_1PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge.

In a certain sense, all forgers are impostors and, similarly, impostors in connection with commercial paper in a broad sense are usually forgers. But in the law merchant they are supposed to be separate people. Thus, if the payee is an impostor, a drawer-drawee (probably more properly considered as a maker) who pays a holder has no recourse on an endorser. If, however, he who signs the name of a payee may be classified as a forger, the drawer-drawee, after paying a subsequent endorser, may still recover his unfortunate payment from the endorser. 1

Of course, it is…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Clearfield Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. National Metropolitan Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. Cohen v. Lincoln Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  5. Security-First Nat. Bank v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Kumaraperu v. Feldsted CA2/1California Court of Appeal · 2015
  2. United States v. Amy Everston JonesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
  3. CLIENTS'SEC. FUND v. Allstate Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987
  4. First State Bank of Wichita Falls v. Oak Cliff Savings & Loan Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, a National Banking Association v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API