Crooks v. People's Nat. Bank

For majority opinion, see 76 N. Y. Supp. 92.

PARKER, P. J.

I cannot concur in the result which my brethren have reached in this case.

Briefly stated, the situation is as follows: Howard E. King & Son had drawn drafts to the extent of some $12,000 upon one Searles, and. *496had procured them to be discounted by the defending bank. Some of such drafts were past due and had gone to protest; others had not yet matured. Searles was supposed to be insolvent. Howard E. King was the president of such bank. The bank examiner criticised these drafts as “one-name paper,” and owing to such criticism the…