First National Bank v. Ricker
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Adams county; the Hon. Joseph Sibley, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scott
The cases are numerous that decide the dratvee must be presumed to know his correspondent’s signature. In case he makes payment to an innocent holder for value, he is concluded by the act, notwithstanding the bill may turn out to be a forgery. If he accepts a bill, he must pay it, and if he has paid it in the usual course of business, he can not recover the money back from the payee, or holder. Price v. Neale, 3 Burr. 1354; Wilson v. Alexander, 3 Scam. 392; Hoffman v. Bank of Milwaukee, 12 Wall. 181; Bank of U. S. v. Bank of Georgia, 10 Wheaton, 348.
The same principle, for still more politic…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- President of the Bank of the United States v. President of the Bank of GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
- Hoffman & Co. v. Bank of MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Hefner v. VandolahIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Shouse v. UtterbackCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859
3Cited by27 opinions
- First National Bank v. Northwestern National BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- First National Bank of Danvers v. First National Bank of SalemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- People's Bank v. Franklin BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1889
- Farmers National Bank v. Farmers & Traders BankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- National Bank of Rolla v. First National Bank of SalemMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.