State v. . Crawford
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
A postdated check, given for a past due account, is not a representation, importing criminal liability if untrue, that the drawer has funds or credit in the bank, sufficient to pay the same upon presentation.
The fact tbat the check is postdated would seem to imply no more than that on its date, the drawer will have or expects to have, funds or credit in the bank sufficient to insure its payment at that time. 11 R. O. L., 853. Thus the status of the parties, except for the additional promise represented thereby, would apparently be the same, or remain unchanged, for the time being at least.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Standard Trust Co. of New York v. Commercial National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- State v. . FalknerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- State v. . YarboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
3Cited by15 opinions
- Dickerson v. . Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Dickerson v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Gumm v. HeiderOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Ennis v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1957
- Cook v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.