Chicago Railway Equipment Co. v. Merchants' Bank
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Mr. Justice Harlan, in the opinion of the court, stated the case as follows: This action was brought by the Merchants’ National Bapk of Chicago against the Chicago Railway Equipment Company, a corporation of Wisconsin, upon two written instruments, one of which is in the words and figures following: “ $5,000. Chicago, 111., January 20, a.d. 1884. “For value received, four months after…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Mr. Justice Harlan, in the opinion of the court, stated the case as follows: This action was brought by the Merchants’ National Bapk of Chicago against the Chicago Railway Equipment Company, a corporation of Wisconsin, upon two written instruments, one of which is in the words and figures following: “ $5,000. Chicago, 111., January 20, a.d. 1884. “For value received, four months after date, the Chicago Railway Equipment Company promise to pay to the order of the Northwestern Manufacturing and Car Company of…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Harlan,
after stating the.case in the opinion of the court as above reported, continued:
Are the writings in suit to be regarded as promissory notes to be protected, in the hands of bona fide holders for value, according to the rules of general mercantile law as applicable to negotiable instruments, or are they anything more than simple contracts subject, in the hands of transferees, to such equities and defences as would be available between the original parties ? This is the question upon which, it is conceded, depends the correctness of the several rulings to which the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Carpenter v. LonganSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Arkansas Valley Land & Cattle Co. v. MannSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Harkness v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Heryford v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Swift v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by129 opinions
- Aggarao v. MOL SHIP MANAGEMENT CO., LTD.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
- William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. HutchinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Malone v. MeresSupreme Court of Florida · 1926
- Enoch v. BrandonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. St. Louis Cypress Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1908
124 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.