Legal Opinion
Mills v. Barney
California Supreme Court
Decided July 1, 1863PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.
In the year 1859, Joseph Cox, deposited with the plaintiffs, who are bankers, in the City of Sacramento, the sum of $2,000, for which they issued to him a certificate of deposit, in the usual form. Afterwards, in 1861, the certificate was presented for payment at their banking house, indorsed as follows :
“ Pay to the order of Daniel Clark.
“ JOSEPH (his X mark) COX.
“ Pay to the order of Wells, Fargo & Co.
“DANIEL CLARK.
“ Indorsement of Daniel Clark is correct.
“ W. F. & CO.—ELDRIDGE.”
It was duly paid upon presentation, to the agent of Wells, Fargo & Co., the defendants. Immediately after the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hortsman v. HenshawSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Herrick v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- Hubbly v. Brown & Nichols.New York Supreme Court · 1819
3Cited by6 opinions
- Coleman v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. San Francisco BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- McCully v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Purcell v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
- Morrison v. Concordia Fire InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.