Legal Opinion
Dyar v. McCandless
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided June 28, 1929No. 8465PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOOTH, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from an order striking out an answer, and conditionally holding plaintiff entitled to judgment..
Appellee, plaintiff below, brought an action at law against appellant on a promissory note which he had given to the De Smet National Bank March 5,1926, and which was due May 5,1926. May 21,1926, the bank become insolvent, and plaintiff was duly appointed receiver.
Defendant Dyar set up in his answer that on February 13, 1926, the bank had issued four certificates of deposit, payable to the order of J. A. Burkart or Marie B. Burkart, twelve months after date…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Missouri & Kansas Interurban Railway Co. v. City of OlatheSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- City and County of San Francisco v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Clark v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Highway Const. Co. v. McClellandCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1926
- Radio Corp. of America v. J. H. Bunnell & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Crutcher v. JoyceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1943
- Miller v. Pyrites Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
- Lockhart v. New York Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
- Miller-Crenshaw Co. v. Colorado Mill & Elevator Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- United States ex rel. Kelly v. BibbCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.