Bank of Pittsburgh v. Whitehead, Sproul & Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the district court of Allegheny county. Bank of Pittsburgh against Thomas T. Whitehead, Christian Ihmsen, Charles Ihmsen, and Robert Sproul, trading in the name of Whitehead, Sproul & Co. This was an action on the case in assumpsit, founded upon two accepted drafts drawn by Whitehead, Sproul & Co., on R. S. Swearingen & Co., in favour of R. C. Grier, for 266 dollars and 80 cents, and 647 dollars and 33 cents, dated the 15th of January and 25th March 1839, at six and…
Read the full summary
ERROR to the district court of Allegheny county. Bank of Pittsburgh against Thomas T. Whitehead, Christian Ihmsen, Charles Ihmsen, and Robert Sproul, trading in the name of Whitehead, Sproul & Co. This was an action on the case in assumpsit, founded upon two accepted drafts drawn by Whitehead, Sproul & Co., on R. S. Swearingen & Co., in favour of R. C. Grier, for 266 dollars and 80 cents, and 647 dollars and 33 cents, dated the 15th of January and 25th March 1839, at six and four months, discounted by the' bank, and protested for.non-payment, of which (he defendants had regular notice. The…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
Where there is a spark of evidence, the question of fact must be submitted to the jury as the legitimate triers of it. In this instance the evidence would be ample to affect a natural person with notice of the dissolution; but the party to be affected is a corporation. Notice to an individual corporator, if he be not constituted by the charter or by-laws an organ of communication betwixt the corporation and those who deal with it, is not notice to it, because any presumption that he delivered what he had received to the body, would be…
2Cited by8 opinions
- McCarty v. KepretaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
- Bouton v. Board of SupervisorsIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
- Waynesville Nat. Bank v. IronsUnited States Circuit Court · 1881
- Bank of St. Marys v. Mumford & TysonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1849
- Blood v. La Serena Land and Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.