Cunningham v. Merchants' Nat. Bank of Manchester

*34ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.

e (dissenting). With much regret, I- find myself utterly unable to agree'with the’majority of the court. The' case is one of great importance, both to the defendant and as a precedent. I do agree with them' that the question “before us is a question- largely of fact.” Of course, if Ponzi’s. account' was, as the majority hold, merely “an ordinary general account, subject to cheek,” without more, the defendant is not liable. I cannot think that conclusion is warranted by the evidence, or even by the findings of the court below.

Under these circumstances, it seems better…