Legal Opinion

Farmers Mech.' Bank of Kent v. . Butchers Drovers' Bk.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 5, 1856PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

I find no difficulty in saying that the plaintiffs were thebona fide holders for value of the checks in question. The jury have found that fact upon sufficient evidence, and a correct statement of the law by the judge. The obligation incurred by bankers who certify the checks of their dealers in the manner in which the checks in question were certified is, that they will retain the amount for which the check is drawn, and which, by the certificate, they admit they have in hand to the drawer's credit, to meet the check when presented, and that they will pay it to the holder on demand. It would…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State of Illinois v. DelafieldNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
  2. Stoney v. American Life InsuranceNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
  3. Laverty v. BurrNew York Supreme Court · 1828
  4. Livingston v. HastieNew York Supreme Court · 1804

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Clark v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
  2. Continental National Bank v. National Bank of the CommonwealthNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. Griswold v. . HavenNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  4. City National Bank v. ThomasNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Lynch v. First National Bank of Jersey CityNew York Court of Appeals · 1887

11 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