Legal Opinion

First National Bank v. State Bank

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1924PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRand, J.

Where a certain specific sum of money is delivered to a bank with directions to transmit that particular money or to substitute other money in place of it and then transmit the substituted money to a particular person or bank, the relation of principal and agent, as well as that of bailor and bailee, arises from the transaction. The bank’s possession of the money is that of a bailee, and in carrying out the instructions of the owner of the money the bank acts as agent for the owner. This fiduciary relation of the bank in respect to the money is in the nature of a trust, and the trust…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Legniti v. Mechanics & Metals National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
  2. Musco v. United Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
  3. Spiroplos v. Scandinavian-American BankWashington Supreme Court · 1921
  4. People ex rel. Zotti v. FlynnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. (Ind.) v. VeigelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  2. Moore Mill & Lumber Co. v. Curry County BankOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Mothersead v. HarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  4. Eppinger v. Allen, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1926

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

Powered by the Exa API