Laughlin v. Marshall
Illinois Supreme Court
ERROR TO COLES. This was a suit by attachment brought by Marshall against Laughlin as indorser of two certificates of deposit. Judgment was rendered at the April term, 1856, of the Coles county Circuit Court, in favor of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO COLES. This was a suit by attachment brought by Marshall against Laughlin as indorser of two certificates of deposit. Judgment was rendered at the April term, 1856, of the Coles county Circuit Court, in favor of the plaintiff. This cause was heard before Harlan, Judge, without the intervention of a jury, upon the following agreed state of facts: It is agreed upon the part of the defendant, as plaintiff’s evidence in part in this case, that the certificates of deposit, the indorsements on which are the foundation of this suit, are the certificates of P. B. Manchester, a private…
1Opinion of the Court
Catón, C. J.
That a certificate of deposit, like these, is, in fact and in law, a promissory note for the payment of money, was expressly settled by this court in the case of the Bank of Peru v. Farnsworth, 18 Ill. R. 563; and we deem it unnecessary to examine the question further now. We are content with the reasons there assigned.
The only remaining question is, whether the plaintiff below was guilty of negligence or unnecessary delay in presenting these certificates for payment. The Circuit Court found that he was not, and we do not feel authorized to disturb that finding. The notes were…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Gossard v. GossardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1945
- Telford v. PattonIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Hunt v. DivineIllinois Supreme Court · 1865
- Black v. WardMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Bonhiver v. State Bank of ClearingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.