Legal Opinion
Central Trust Co. v. Hahn-Jacobsen Co.
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided December 16, 1935PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By ROSS, PJ.
There are certain outstanding facts and conclusions apparent from the foregoing statement.
Peters was employed to collect the amount due plaintiff from the insurance company in New York. Payment of this debt was made to the duly accredited agent of the plaintiff. Peters received payment of the account and his estate is responsible therefor.
This is not such a case as was developed in Central Trust Co. v Backsman, 3 OO 546, (198 NE 730; 50 Oh Ap 512; 19 Abs 541) for there payment was made by the bank to a person not the agent of the drawee. The drawer of the check indebted to…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Dispatch Printing Co. v. National Bank of CommerceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Columbia Mill Co. v. National Bank of CommerceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Crahe v. Mercantile Trust & Savings BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
- Connell v. McLoughlinOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Harrisburg Lumber Co. v. WashburnOregon Supreme Court · 1896
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Palomo v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- Modern Homes Construction Co. v. Tryon Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- The Florida Bar v. Allstate Ins. Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Third National Bank & Trust Co. v. Diamond Savings & Loan Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1987
- Helgeson v. Farmers Ins. ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.