Legal Opinion
Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Planenscheck
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 7, 1930PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The following opinion was filed November 5, 1929:
Owen, J.
It was early held that the drawee of a bill of exchange could not recover the amount paid out by him on a bill to which the name of the drawer had been forged, in an action for money had and received. Price v. Neal, 3 Burr. 1355. It was said that the drawee was bound to know the handwriting of the drawer, that his negligence in paying out money on the forged signature of the drawer was greater than the negligence of any one else connected with the bill, and that “where the loss has fallen there it must lie. One innocent man must not…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Figuers v. FlyTennessee Supreme Court · 1916
- Title Guarantee Trust Co. v. . HavenNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- First Nat. Bank v. United States Nat. BankOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- National Bank of Commerce v. Mechanics' American National BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- National Bank of Rolla v. First National Bank of SalemMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Newco Land Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1948
- Louisa National Bank v. Kentucky National BankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. Peoples Exchange Bank of ThorpWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Security State Bank & Trust Co. of Beaumont v. First Nat. Bank of ShreveportLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1940
- Winkie, Inc. v. Heritage Bank of Whitefish BayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.