Legal Opinion

Cummings v. Spaunhorst

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 18, 1877PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. The charter of tbe bank could not exempt it from regulations made in the exercise of the police power of the State. — Cooley’s Const.

Read the full summary

Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. The charter of tbe bank could not exempt it from regulations made in the exercise of the police power of the State. — Cooley’s Const. Lim. 575; The State v. Matthews, 44 Mo. 528. Where the officers of a corporation perpetrate a fraud in its name, they are responsible to the party injured, in a civil action for the damage. — 7 Mass. 187 ; Salmon v. Richardson, 30 Conn. 373. The remedy against the bank need not be exhausted before proceeding against the officers. — Molcelumne v. Woodburn, 14 Cal. 167; Davidson v. Rankin, 34 Cal. 505; McLaine v. Monroe, 30 Mo.…

1Opinion of the CourtHayden, J.

The questions here involved arise on demurrer to a petition which alleges that on March 2, 1876, the plaintiffs deposited with and loaned to the Central Savings Bank, a *23corporation under the laws of Missouri, ana a banking institution, $5,000 for six months; that at that date, and before, the bank was insolvent and in failing circumstances ; that the defendants, and each of them, had knowledge of these facts, and concealed them from plaintiffs, who were ignorant thereof, and that the defendants, with such knowledge, assented to the reception of this deposit and the creation of this debt by…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
  2. Groves v. SlaughterSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
  3. ROWAN v. RunnelsSupreme Court of the United States · 1847
  4. State v. MathewsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
  5. St. Joseph Board of Public Schools v. PattenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Noble State Bank v. HaskellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  2. Fischer v. TammMissouri Court of Appeals · 1882
  3. Blakeman v. BentonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1880

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API