Mechanics' Bank v. Bank of Niagara
New York Supreme Court
Error from the superior court of the city of New-York. The Bank of Niagara sued the Mechanics’ Bank, and declared in assumpsit for money had and received, money lent, See.
Read the full summary
Error from the superior court of the city of New-York. The Bank of Niagara sued the Mechanics’ Bank, and declared in assumpsit for money had and received, money lent, See. On the' trial, it appeared that the Bank of Niagara held a bond and mortgage against one A. S. Clarke, bearing date 1st March; 1819, given to them to secure the payment of $2250. On the 28th March, 1820, by an endorsement on the bond, they assigned to Seth Jenkins and his asssigns $1933,61, “ of the within bond,” and authorized him to dehi and and receive the same, and to take all legal means for the collection of the said…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The legal construction of the assignment from the plaintiffs below to Jenkins, (in whose place the defendants stand,) independently of the parol evidence given upon the trial, it appears to me, entitles the defendants to priority of satisfaction out of the proceeds of the mortgage, to the extent of the interest assigned to them. The plaintiffs were indebted to the Bank of Hudson, whom Jenkins represented, and when called upon for payment or security assigned to Jenkins an interest in the bond and mortgage in question, to the extent of $1933,-61, and expressly…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Ladue v. Detroit & Milwaukee RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Mortgage CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Marine Bank v. International BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Parkhurst v. Watertown Steam Engine Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Granger v. . CrouchNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.