Currey v. Joplin Savings Bank
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — Hon. Hugh Dabbs, Judge. (1) John Carlson clothed Williams with apparent title, and the law should protect the bank on the ground of estoppel even if the instruments were non-negotiable.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — Hon. Hugh Dabbs, Judge. (1) John Carlson clothed Williams with apparent title, and the law should protect the bank on the ground of estoppel even if the instruments were non-negotiable. Coudry v. Yandeburg, 101 U. S. 1. c. 575-6; Coudry v. Yandeburg, 154 U. S. 659; Looney v. District of Columbia, 113 U. S. 261; Laughlin v. District of Columbia, 116 U. S. 489-491; Preston v. Witherspoon, 109' Ind. 46-4; Hirsch v. Norton, 115 Ind. 343; Dymock v. Railroad, 54 Mo. App. 409; Babcock v. Bank, 118 Ind. 213 ; Whitemore v. Obear, 58 Mo. 280-286; Bank v. Bank, 71 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBroaddus, J.
The petition upon which plaintiff seeks to recover is in two counts. The first is a cause of action based upon a deposit made by one John Carlson on the 22nd day of April, 1902, and the right of action thereon assigned to plaintiff; the second count is for money had and received.
The undisputed facts are: That on the 22nd day of April, 1902, said Carlson, in company with one R. H. Williams, weilt to defendant bank in Joplin where Carlson, who was identified by Williams, deposited a draft on a St. Louis bank for $3,000, and received from the bank four certificates of deposit, viz: Two for…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McNeil v. . the Tenth National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Williams v. WallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- State v. MurphyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- State v. HallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Walters v. TielkemeyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
3Cited by1 opinion
- East St. Louis Cotton Oil Co. v. Bank of SteeleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1918