National Bank v. Hall
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Swayne
This is an action of tort growing out of a contract. The bill of exceptions is well drawn, and reflects clearly the points in issue between the parties. A brief statement of the case, as it appears in the record, will be sufficient for the purposes of this opinion.
During the years 1874, 1875, and up to April 1, 1876, a firm under the name of Hall, Patterson, & Co. had existed at Chicago. It consisted of S. Frank Hall, Frank D. Patterson, and Augustus L. Patterson, three of the five defendants in error. Their business was selling live-stock on commission at the Chicago stock-yards. William Gr.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Chicago & Great Eastern Railway Co. v. DaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Utley v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Adams, Cunningham & Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- White v. . CorliesNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Barns v. . BarrowNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by81 opinions
- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway v. Columbus Rolling MillSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. McElroyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
- Breckinridge v. CrockerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Byers v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Byers v. ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.