Duncan v. . Berlin
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
We think that the plaintiffs were not entitled to deduct the check of $1,500, to Leary, from the balance due Blagge Co. A check upon a bank does not operate as an assignment of the money deposited, specified in it. This has been repeatedly decided in this court. (3 Coms., 93; 2 Seld., 412.) A check is said to be a bill of exchange payable on demand. The drawee owes no duty to the holder until the check is presented and accepted. (Id.) The statement of the clerk to the holder, that the check was in order and would be paid before the attachment was served, is of no avail. A parol acceptance is…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Harrison v. WrightIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Grammel v. CarmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Dickinson v. CoatesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Donohoe-Kelly Banking Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1902
- Ballen Friedman v. Bank of KremlinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.