Wild v. Bank of Passamaquoddy
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine
Assumpsit on a bill of exchange by the plaintiff [William Wild], as indorsee, against the defendants, as indorsers. The bill was drawn by one James Franklin on E. F. Green, London, for £260 sterling, payable to one Patterson, or order, in ninety days after sight.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a bill of exchange by the plaintiff [William Wild], as indorsee, against the defendants, as indorsers. The bill was drawn by one James Franklin on E. F. Green, London, for £260 sterling, payable to one Patterson, or order, in ninety days after sight. The hill was indorsed by Patterson in blank, and by a course of negotiation became the property of the Bank of Passama-quoddy, and was indorsed by the cashier thereof in behalf of the bank, and came to the possession of the plaintiff by a subsequent indorsement. It was duly presented to the drawee and protested for non-acceptance.…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
lily opinion is, that neither of the objections is well founded in law. The cashier of a bank is, virtute officii, generally entrusted with the notes, securities, and other funds of the bank, and is held out to the world by the bank as its general agent in the negotiation, management, and disposal of them. Prima facie, therefore, he must be deemed to have authority to transfer and indorse negotiable securities, heid by the bank, for its use and in its behalf. No special authority for this purpose is necessary to be proved. If any bank chooses to depart from this general…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Hanover Nat. Bank of New York v. First Nat. Bank of BurlingameCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Xenia Bank v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Warner v. PenoyerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1898
- Merchants' Bank v. Central BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1846
- Davenport v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.