Bank v. Green
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Dauphin county. This was an action by the Bank of Swatara against Innis Green, founded on his indorsement of a note.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Dauphin county. This was an action by the Bank of Swatara against Innis Green, founded on his indorsement of a note. The plaintiffs, to maintain the issue on their part, offered to prove by George Fisher, Esq. the following facts, to wit: “ That the note now in suit, was put in suit by him for the Bank of Swatara, and that he has had repeated conversations with Innis Green, defendant, in relation to this note, and the matter of those conversations, when he admitted his liability on this note to his full amount, and that he never complained of not having received…
1Per curiam
The intervention of creditors might affect the competency of an original subscriber, who certainly could not get rid of his contract of subscription by assigning his stock in payment of his debts, especially to the bank itself. The specific powers of a court of chancery would reach such a case; and the only difficulty with us would be to reach it with our limited means: but there were in fact no creditors to be satisfied. The debts of the bank were paid, and it was barely doubtful whether it was not whole even as to the capital stock. The business then was to divide, and not to call in ; so…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hartman v. Keystone InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853