Mitchell v. Easton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Mower county, against the defendants as surviving partners of the banking firm of Smith, Wilkins & Easton, upon a certificate of deposit in the following form, viz.: “MoweR County Bane, Austin, Minn., March 29, 1876. “L. S. Mitchell, Esq., has deposited in this bank seven hundred fifty and no-100 dollars, payable to the order of himself, in current bank notes, on the return of this certificate properly indorsed,…
Read the full summary
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Mower county, against the defendants as surviving partners of the banking firm of Smith, Wilkins & Easton, upon a certificate of deposit in the following form, viz.: “MoweR County Bane, Austin, Minn., March 29, 1876. “L. S. Mitchell, Esq., has deposited in this bank seven hundred fifty and no-100 dollars, payable to the order of himself, in current bank notes, on the return of this certificate properly indorsed, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, per annum. “Smith, Wilkins & Easton.” Certain payments upon this certificate…
1Opinion of the Court
Vanderburgh, J.1
The contract or obligation sued on is what is-commonly known as a certificate of deposit, made in the ordinary course of business, and dated March 29, 1876. The last payment thereon was made more than six years prior to the commencement of this action; and the question here presented is whether a suit might have been brought upon it immediately upon its execution, without a previous demand, as in the case of promissory notes payable on demand, or whether, in order to set the statute of limitations running, the certificate should have been first presented for payment. In Branch…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Farmers & Mechanics' Bank v. Butchers & Drovers' BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Payne v. . GardinerNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Wheeler v. . WarnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Howland v. . EdmondsNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Henry Miller, in Error v. David Austen, William S. Wilmerding, and David Austen, Jr.Supreme Court of the United States · 1852
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Andrews v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Mereness v. First National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Turner v. Iron Chief Mining Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- State v. Northwestern National Bank of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- Koelzer v. First National BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.