Legal Opinion

Exchange Bank v. . Monteath

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 5, 1863PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

There are two grounds upon which, in my opinion, the plaintiffs can recover upon these drafts, and the defendant's liability upon them is unquestionable.

1. The drafts were made and issued by the two partners, Joy and Hoyt, in the name of the partnership, and although the proceeds of the drafts did not inure to its benefit, it must be held liable.

2. The acts of Joy and Hoyt in making and issuing these drafts, must, under the circumstances, be held as binding upon the defendants, their principals, for whom they acted as agents; and as such, clearly and undeniably, they had authority to make,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farmers & Mechanics' Bank v. Butchers & Drovers' BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
  2. Griswold v. . HavenNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  3. Laverty v. BurrNew York Supreme Court · 1828
  4. Livingston v. HastieNew York Supreme Court · 1804
  5. Exchange Bank v. MonteathNew York Supreme Court · 1853

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Clark v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
  2. New York & New Haven Railroad v. SchuylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  3. N.Y. N.H.R.R. Co. v. . SchuylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  4. Wilson v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Briggs v. KennettNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API