Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cudahy Packing Co. v. Sioux Nat. Bank of Sioux City

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided June 22, 1896No. 599Published

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Iowa. This was an action at law by the Sioux National Bank of Sioux City against the Cudahy Packing Company to recover a sum of money. A jury was waived, and a trial had before a referee appointed by the court, which resulted in a judgment for plaintiff. 63 Fed. 805. • In this court the judgment was heretofore affirmed (16 C. C. A. 410, 69 Fed. 782), but a rehearing was granted.

1DissentSanborn, Circuit Judge

I am unable to concur in the view of this case taken by the majority of the court. Tin» instrument on which the action is based wants the indispensable characteristics of negotiable paper. It is not payable to order or bearer, and is, in effect, a inert» voucher for expenditures of the Union Loan & Trust Company for the account of the Cudahy Packing Company. It is true that the voucher hears on its fact; the statement thal when approved, dated, and signed, it shall become a draft on the Cudahy Packing Company, and that it is approved, dated, and signed. Put T dissent from the proposition on…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Downing v. GibsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
  2. Sayre v. WheelerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
  3. Callanan v. WindsorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
  4. Keifer v. SummersIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Bailey v. Town of PaullinaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886

4 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