Legal Opinion

First National Bank of Hagerman v. Stringfield

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided April 14, 1925PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¥M. E. LEE, J.

Respondent Stringfield moves to dismiss the appeal because the transcript was not filed within ninety days after the appeal was perfected, as provided by Rule 26, no extensions of time having been obtained under Rule 28. For the reasons stated in Nielson v. Board of County Commissioners of Bonneville County, ante, p. 481, 234 Pac. 686, and on the authority of that decision the motion i® denied.

This is an action by.a national bank to recover from its former cashier the amount of certain excess loans made in violation of sec. 5200, U. S. Rev. Stats. It is the theory of appellant…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Corsicana Nat. Bank of Corsicana v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  2. Wallace v. Lincoln Savings BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Wynn v. Tallapoosa County BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  4. Bowerman v. HamnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  5. Commercial Nat. Bank v. PirieCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Boise Street Car Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Miller v. Gooding Highway Dist.Idaho Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Schneider v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
  4. Hinckley Estate Co. v. GurryIdaho Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Webb v. CashWyoming Supreme Court · 1926

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API