Bank of Menlo v. Arnold & Co.
Alabama Court of Appeals
Assumpsit. Appeal from Cherokee Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. Haralson. Assumpsit by J. H. Arnold & Co. against the Bank of Menlo. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. The bank being a nonresident, the action was begun by attachment, and was served by garnishing a number of parties.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Appeal from Cherokee Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. Haralson. Assumpsit by J. H. Arnold & Co. against the Bank of Menlo. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. The bank being a nonresident, the action was begun by attachment, and was served by garnishing a number of parties. Bond was executed in dissolution of the attachment, and the Fidelity & Deposit Company became sureties on said bond, and judgment was entered against defendant and said sureties. The following charges were refused defendant: “(1) If Paden directed the cashier to send money by Drake, then a…
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN,(1) The plaintiff made a general deposit of money to his credit in the defendant’s bank, to be used by plaintiff’s agent Paden in the purchase of *464cotton for plaintiff. This created the relation of creditor and debtor between the plaintiff and the defendant.—Tallapoosa, County Bank v. Salmon, 12 Ala. App. 589, 68 South. 542; Clisby v. Mastin, 150 Ala. 133, 43 South. 742, 124 Am. St. Rep. 64; South. Hardware Co. v. Lester, 166 Ala. 86, 52 South. 328. And if on demand the bank refused to pay any balance due on account of such deposit, it was liable in an action by the depositor.—Tobias v.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Syndicate Insurance v. CatchingsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Wheeler v. McGuire, Scoggins & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Brandon v. Progress Distilling Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Tobias v. Josiah Morris & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Fuller v. WhitlockSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cummings v. S. Funkenstein Co.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1919