Farrell v. First Nat. Bank
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
At Law. Action by J. Walter Farrell, Charles Weil, Sumner S. Weil, and John McKey, trading as Weil, Farrell & Co., against the First National Bank of Philadelphia. Upon rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON, District Judge.
From the plaintiffs’ statement of claim and the affidavit of defense, the relevant facts for the purposes of this rule may be stated as follows:
The plaintiffs are engaged at Boston in the purchase and sale of commercial paper. The plaintiffs in 1910 opened a Philadelphia office, and placed one M. T. Snyder in charge as their Philadelphia agent for the sale of commercial paper in Philadelphia and vicinity. On March 22, 1910, the plaintiffs opened an account with the Merchants’ National Bank of Philadelphia, which was subsequently merged, into the First National Bank of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Leather Manufacturers' Bank v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Shipman v. Bank of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Jordan Marsh Co. v. National Shawmut BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Weisser v. . DenisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Pennsylvania Railroad Company's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Philadelphia v. FarrellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1921
- Foshay Trust & Savings Bank v. Public Utilities Consol. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- First Camden Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. J. R. Watkins Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1941
- Huntingdon County v. First-Grange National Bank, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Huntingdon County1959