Legal Opinion

Mandeville v. Union Bank of Georgetown

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 18, 1815PublishedCited by 12 opinions

ERRfiR to the Circuit Court for the district" of Columbia, for the county, of Alexandria, in an action debt, by the Union Bank against Mandeville, upon bis proinissory note to C. I. Nourse, indorsed to the bank. { On the trial below a special verdict was found which states the following facts: . On the 15th of January, 1811, Mandeville, then always an inhabitant of the town of Mexandia, (in -the county of Alexandria) for a valuable, consideration madehis promissory note at…

Read the full summary

ERRfiR to the Circuit Court for the district" of Columbia, for the county, of Alexandria, in an action debt, by the Union Bank against Mandeville, upon bis proinissory note to C. I. Nourse, indorsed to the bank. { On the trial below a special verdict was found which states the following facts: . On the 15th of January, 1811, Mandeville, then always an inhabitant of the town of Mexandia, (in -the county of Alexandria) for a valuable, consideration madehis promissory note at the said town, payable to C.I. Nourse (or order,) sixty days after date; negotiable at the Union Bank of Georgetown ;…

1Opinion of the Court

Marshall, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the Court as follows:

It is entirely immaterial whether this question be governed by the laws of Virginia or of Maryland' By neither of them can the discounts claimed by the Plaintiff in error be allowed.

By making a note negotiable in bank, the maker authorizes the hank to advance on his credit to the owner of the note the sum expressed on its face.

It would be a fraud on the bank to set up offsets against tins note in consequence of any transactions between the parties. These offsets arevaivd and cannot, after the note has been discounted, be again s t…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Stadler v. First National BankMontana Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Merchants & Planters Bank v. MeyerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
  3. Grissom v. Commerial National BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Bedford Bank v. AcoamIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Union Producing Co. v. Placid Oil Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1965

7 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