Union Bank v. Kerr
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from Baltimore County Court. Assumpsit by the appellee against the appellant, to recover the surplus proceeds of certain notes deposited in the Union Bank for collection, by Edward M. Kerr, after payment of his indebtedness to said bank. The declaration contained all the common counts. Plea non assumpsit. Exception.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Baltimore County Court. Assumpsit by the appellee against the appellant, to recover the surplus proceeds of certain notes deposited in the Union Bank for collection, by Edward M. Kerr, after payment of his indebtedness to said bank. The declaration contained all the common counts. Plea non assumpsit. Exception. The plaintiff offered in evidence the assignment, which is set out in the opinion of this court, and under which he claimed the fund in question, executed and delivered to him by Edward M. Kerr, on the 21st of August 1846, and produced and shown to the bank on the day…
1Opinion of the CourtMason, J.
In this case the Union Bank is but a mere nominal party. It had received certain notes or obligations from E. M. Kerr, to meet his liability to that bank, and now holds, after paying its own debt, a surplus of $574, subject to the order or demand of any one legally entitled to claim it. John D. Kerr the plaintiff, (now appellee,) claims the fund, and this action was instituted to recover it. To support his claim, the plaintiff offered in evidence the following paper or instrument of writing, to wit:
“For value received, I assign to John D. Kerr, all- the notes now deposited for collection in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Poe v. DuckCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
- Atwell v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1854
- Charles v. ClagettCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1852
- Brice v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1845
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kerr v. Union BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1862