Legal Opinion

Converse Rubber Co. v. Boston-Continental Nat. Bank

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided December 18, 1936No. 3167PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBingham, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above).

In disposing the claim of the plaintiff against the Federal Reserve Bank, the District Court pointed out that that bank received the plaintiff’s check from the First National Bank for collection; that it acted only as agent for the forwarding bank; that any checks not actually and finally paid were to be charged back to the forwarding bank; that the check in question was not paid in actually and finally collected funds; and that, under the terms of the agreement between the Continental Bank and the Reserve Bank, the Continental Bank had an unconditional…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Mademoiselle Of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
  2. Hibernia National Bank v. Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1984
  3. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Federal Deposit InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1983
  4. Seattle-First National Bank v. Federal Deposit InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1985
  5. Downriver Community Federal Credit Union v. Penn Square Bank, Through Its Receiver, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Wood Products Credit Union, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Penn Square Bank, Through Its Receiver, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Defendant-Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989

3 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