Briggs & Drum v. N. Holmes & Sons
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR TO THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 139, October Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 237 September Term 1885, C. P. No. 1. On July 2, 1885, this suit was begun below by N. Holmes & Sons, bankers, of Pittsburgh, against C. Q. Briggs and John Drum, partners as Briggs & Drum.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 139, October Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 237 September Term 1885, C. P. No. 1. On July 2, 1885, this suit was begun below by N. Holmes & Sons, bankers, of Pittsburgh, against C. Q. Briggs and John Drum, partners as Briggs & Drum. In 1884, Briggs & Drum, live-stock commission merchants at Central Stock-yards, sold stock for Alexander & Co., who drew on them for the proceeds, $2,700, the draft being sent to N. Holmes & Sons for collection. On Saturday, May 24th, Briggs & Drum took up the draft by a cashier’s check of…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Me. Justice Steeeett :
Briggs & Drum, plaintiffs in error, sold live stock, on commission, for Alexander & Co., who, through N. Holmes & Sons, drew on them for $2,700, proceeds of sale. In this suit on the draft, the defence of Briggs & Drum was payment, on presentation, by cashier’s check of the Penn Bank to the order of N. Holmes & Sons, plaintiffs below. The latter admitted the check was received by them, but not as absolute payment. The question, therefore, was whether the cashier’s check was received as absolute or only as conditional payment, and *288whether, under the evidence, that…
2Cited by9 opinions
- First Pennsylvania Bank, N. A. v. TriesterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Citizens' Bk. of Wind Gap v. LipschitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Dille v. WhiteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Romaine v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- N. Holmes & Sons v. Briggs & DrumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.