Legal Opinion · Dissent

First National Bank, Paris v. McKeen.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 20, 1939No. 4-5326Published

1DissentHolt, J.

I cannot agree with the majority opinion in this case. The effect of it is to say to every bank in this state that when one of them credits a customer’s account with a check (or checks) drawn on it, it does so at its peril. In other words, should the bank after having given its customer’s account credit for the check drawn on it, find out, at the close of business, on the same day during which the deposit was made, that there Avere insufficient funds in the account on Avhich the check Avas draAvn to cover it, then the bank regardless of any custom, or agreement with the customer, Avould not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. National Bank v. BurkhardtSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Pollack v. National Bank of CommerceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
  3. Townley v. Exchange Nat. BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  4. Bank of Charleston v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API