Legal Opinion

Gladstone Exchange Bank v. Keating

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1892PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Reilly, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion of Grant, J.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

I think the judgment in this case should be reversed.

It appears that the two defendants joined in a letter to the plaintiff, instructing it to pay no checks on the part of defendants unless they were countersigned by Robert C. Sheehan, son of the defendant Sheehan, and the bookkeeper of the firm. Notwithstanding this direction, the plaintiff paid 22 checks, for the amount'of which defendants deny liability. There was no showing by the plaintiff that the defendants derived any benefit from the moneys received upon these checks. It rests its claim of liability upon the contract implied from'…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Leather Manufacturers' Bank v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1886

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. University National Bank v. WolfeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  2. Cline-Clark Co. v. State Trust & Savings Bank of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
  3. Render v. Arkansas Valley Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
  4. Davis, Et Vir v. BattleSupreme Court of Florida · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API