Legal Opinion

Roger Williams National Bank v. Hall

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 28, 1893PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

The question in this case is whether the holder of a partnership note made payable to one partner and indorsed by him to the holder can prove it in insolvency against the estates both of the firm and of the indorsing partner before any dividend is declared on either. The statute is silent. Intimations in favor of the right of double proof are to be found in Borden v. Cuyler, 10 Cush. 476, 477, and in Mead v. National Bank of Fayetteville, 6 Blatchf. C. C. 180, and in the decisions in In re Farnum, 6 Law Rep. 21 (by Judge Sprague), and Ex parte Nason, 70 Maine, 363. The United States Bankrupt…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Vanuxem v. BurrMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  2. Miller's River National Bank v. JeffersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
  3. Emery v. Canal Nat. BankU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1872
  4. In re FarnumDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1843

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Myers v. International Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Fourth National Bank v. MeadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  3. Faneuil Hall National Bank v. MeloonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
  4. Hawkins v. MahoneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
  5. Pattee v. PaigeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895

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

Powered by the Exa API