Legal Opinion

Marine National Bank of Buffalo v. Baringer

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 17, 1911No. Appeal, No. 78PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal, No. 78, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Sept. Term, 1908, No. 1,569, on verdict for defendant in case of Marine National Bank of Buffalo v. Milton F. Baringer. Assumpsit for money had and received. Before Sulzberger, P. J. The court charged in part as follows: The Niagara Milling Company was a concern in Buffalo, apparently in active business, and probably in good credit which it did not deserve.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 78, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Sept. Term, 1908, No. 1,569, on verdict for defendant in case of Marine National Bank of Buffalo v. Milton F. Baringer. Assumpsit for money had and received. Before Sulzberger, P. J. The court charged in part as follows: The Niagara Milling Company was a concern in Buffalo, apparently in active business, and probably in good credit which it did not deserve. It dealt with the Marine Bank of Buffalo, which appears to be a prosperous, well managed financial concern. It dealt with Baringer in Philadelphia, who…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The plaintiff claims the right to recover against the defendant by virtue of a bill of lading attached to a draft drawn by the Niagara Mill & Elevator Company on the defendant on July 26, 1907, which draft was that day discounted by the plaintiff for the drawer with the bill of lading attached thereto for a car load of corn consigned by the drawer of the draft to the defendant at Belfry, Pennsylvania. The corn had been shipped to the defendant about two weeks before without a request from him, his order having been for one car and the consignor having sent two. When…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pollard v. VintonSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Means v. Bank of RandallSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. The Carlos F. RosesSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  4. Mechanics Bank of Alexandria v. LynnSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  5. Holmes, Lafferty & Co. v. German Security BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Citadel Broadcasting Co. v. Gratz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County2001

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

Powered by the Exa API