United States v. City Bank of Columbus
Supreme Court of the United States
This case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit • Court of the United States for the southern district of Ohio. The facts of the case and also the instructions given to the jury upon the trial are all set forth in the opinion of the court. The Attorney.
Read the full summary
This case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit • Court of the United States for the southern district of Ohio. The facts of the case and also the instructions given to the jury upon the trial are all set forth in the opinion of the court. The Attorney. General contended that it might be true that the cashier had no power to make the appointment, yet the directors had such power, and. the cashier’s letter may fairly be considered as a certificate that the appointment had been legally made; because, if the directors had appointed Miner, the cashier would-have written just such a…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Wayne
The only question arising on this record is, whether the court erred in so much of the charge to the jury as is set out in the bill of exceptions. Objections were taken in the course of the trial to testimony, but no exceptions were taken to the rulings of the court upon them. The declaration in the case contained two counts — one of them alleging that a contract had been made between the City Bank of Columbus and the United States, by which the bank agreed, on the 1st November, 1856, to.transfer one hundred thousand dollars of the public money from New York to New Orleans by the first of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Fleckner v. President of the Bank of the United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Bank of United States v. DunnSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
3Cited by46 opinions
- Martin v. WebbSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Aliquippa National Bank v. HarveySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Hier v. MillerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
- Anderson v. KissamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1888
- Smith v. LawrenceSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.