Legal Opinion
Suit & Wells Equipment Co. v. Citizens National Bank
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided October 14, 1971No. [No. 21, September Term, 1971.]PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSingley, J.
This case poses the question whether, under certain circumstances, the holder of a check on which payment has been stopped can require payment by the maker. 1
The facts which gave rise- to the controversy can be briefly told. On 3 September 1966, Shit and'Wells Equipment Co., Inc. (Suit and Wells) issued a check on its account at First National Bank of Southern Maryland (First National), payable to the order of Joseph F. Tayman in the amount of $4,200. The check had been given to Tayman in payment for some equipment which he had promised to deliver the following day. When the equipment was not…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Peoples Bank of Aurora v. HaarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
- Dean v. Eastern Shore Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1930
- Citizens Bank, Booneville, Arkansas v. National Bank of Commerce, Tulsa, OklahomaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1964
- Waltham Citizens National Bank v. FlettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
- Financial Credit Corp. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Von Gohren v. Pacific National BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
- United Overseas Bank v. Veneers, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- Mid-Continent National Bank v. Bank of IndependenceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
- Lawrence v. GrahamCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Bank of Costa Mesa v. LosackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.