Olmstead v. Winsted Bank
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit on a bank bill. Plea the general issue, with notice that the bill had been stolen from the bank and purchased by the plaintiff with knowledge that it had been stolen.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a bank bill. Plea the general issue, with notice that the bill had been stolen from the bank and purchased by the plaintiff with knowledge that it had been stolen. Tried in the superior court, on an issue closed to the court, before Me Curdy, J. On the trial the plaintiff introduced in evidence the bank bill described in his declaration, accompanied by a notarial protest thereof, stating that payment was refused on the ground that the bill had been stolen with others from the bank, and it appeared that the plaintiff bought the.bill at a discount, with knowledge of the protest and…
1Opinion of the Court
Butler, J.*
This case is submitted upon briefs. Upon a careful examination of them we are satisfied that the judgment is right and should not be disturbed.
We assent to the claim of the plaintiff that the protest was not evidence of .the fact that the bills were-stolen, and constituted no objection to a recovery if they were not. It was evidence of notice that the bank claimed that they were stolen, and admissible upon the question of bona fides, and does not appear to have been admitted for any other purpose..
And we assent to the claim that the purchase of the bills at a discount did not…
2Cited by9 opinions
- State v. GuilfoyleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Hanes v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Schmeltz v. TracySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Town of Waterbury v. Waterbury Traction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Carpenter's Appeal From ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.