Legal Opinion
Fish v. First Nat. Bank
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 7, 1907No. 1,187PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
Did the bank, as owner before maturity, of the negotiable promissory note, have a cause of action against Fish by virtue of the partnership agreement between Fish and Loomis, or by virtue of the agreement of dissolution, or both? In the partnership agreement, it was recited that the note was given for money which was used by Loomis to purchase the goods and merchandise which he transferred to the copartnership, and that the indebtedness was assumed by the partnership. In the dissolution agreement, which was made four months later, all of the assets of the partnership were turned over to Fish,…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Keller v. AshfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Hendrick v. LindsaySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Union Mutual Life Insurance v. HanfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Willard v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Dunning v. . LeavittNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Marianna Lime Products Co. v. McKaySupreme Court of Florida · 1933
- Farrell v. Third Nat. Bank in NashvilleCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1936
- Aetna Life Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn. v. MaxwellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
- Assets Realization Co. v. CardonUtah Supreme Court · 1928
- Aetna Insurance Company v. Saul EisenbergCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1961
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.