Smith v. South Royalton Bank
Supreme Court of Vermont
Bill in chancery. From the bill, answers and testimony, it appeared that in August, 1856, Daniei Tarbell, Jr., then a director in the South Royalton Bank, a corporation organized under the general hanking law of 1851, requested the orator, Spencer Smith, to execute to such bank a bond and mortgage of his home farm in Tunbridge to enable the bank, by an assignment of such bond and mortgage to the treasurer of the State, uüder the provisions of that law, to obtain an increased…
Read the full summary
Bill in chancery. From the bill, answers and testimony, it appeared that in August, 1856, Daniei Tarbell, Jr., then a director in the South Royalton Bank, a corporation organized under the general hanking law of 1851, requested the orator, Spencer Smith, to execute to such bank a bond and mortgage of his home farm in Tunbridge to enable the bank, by an assignment of such bond and mortgage to the treasurer of the State, uüder the provisions of that law, to obtain an increased issue of their registered bills ; that Tarbell promised to pay Smith seventy dollars per annum for the use of his farm…
1Opinion of the CourtBennett, J.
This is a case of very considerable importance; and we have endeavored to give it a careful consideration. We havé no doubt, from the testimony, that the bond and mortgage in question in this case were delivered conditionally to Rolfe; to be delivered by him to the State treasurer, when the orator, Spencer Smith, should be indemnified from all loss and damage which should be occasioned to him by reason of the same, and not before. No precise form of words is necessary to make an instrument an escrow, and an escrów has been wjell defined to be the conditional delivery of an obligation or deed,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pawling and Others v. The United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1808
- Maynard v. MaynardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Schimmelpennich v. BayardSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Van Amringe v. MortonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Hinman v. BoothNew York Supreme Court · 1839
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Chicago & Great Western Railroad Land Co. v. PeckIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- Quick v. MilliganIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Stone v. FrenchSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887
- Stanley v. ValentineIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Waynesville Nat. Bank v. IronsUnited States Circuit Court · 1881
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.