High v. Merchants Bank
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court for Lancaster county. Tried below before Pound, J. It was an action brought by High to recover $500 which he claimed to have deposited in the defendant bank, but which the bank claimed was put by the plaintiff into the bank by Eaton, its cashier, in his individual capacity, and to be used by Eaton for his and High’s benefit in purchasing margins on wheat.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court for Lancaster county. Tried below before Pound, J. It was an action brought by High to recover $500 which he claimed to have deposited in the defendant bank, but which the bank claimed was put by the plaintiff into the bank by Eaton, its cashier, in his individual capacity, and to be used by Eaton for his and High’s benefit in purchasing margins on wheat. The jury returned a verdict for defendant, upon which, after the overruli ng of a motion for a new trial, judgment was enteud. cited Qatlm v. Wilcox, 26 Ark., 309. Blosser v. Harshbarger, 21 Gratt., 214. Dewey…
1Opinion of the Court
Lake, Ch. J.
I. The first error of the assignment is that the verdict is not supported by the evidence. On this point all that need be said is that although the testimony as to the purpose of the deposit is not entirely satisfactory still we think it sufficient to sustain the finding of the jury.
It is true that the plaintiff testified substantially, on his examination in chief, that the five hundred dollars was delivered by him to Eaton, then the cashier of the bank, as an ordinary deposit to be placed to his own credit. But opposed to this there is testimony tending pretty strongly to show…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wamsley v. CrookNebraska Supreme Court · 1874
- Meredith v. KennardNebraska Supreme Court · 1871
- Case v. Illinois Central R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1874
3Cited by3 opinions
- Albright v. PetersNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
- Donovan v. YardNebraska Supreme Court · 1884
- Young v. PritchettNebraska Supreme Court · 1880