Opinion

National Park Bank v. Ninth National Bank

  • 55 Barb. 87
  • 1869 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 120
Court
New York Supreme Court
Filed
Jun 7, 1869
Status
Published
Author
Sutherland
On the bench
Ingraham, Sutherland
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 26.4%

The opinion

Sutherland, J., (dissenting.)

I have nothing ’to add to my opinion below, in this case, except this: The case of Jenys v. Fancier (2 Str. 946) was alluded to by the counsel for the plaintiff in Price v. Neale, as reported in 3 Bur. *125 1354 , and 1 Black. 390 ; and from what Lord Raymond said in that case, it is probable that the rule in Price v. Neale was really adopted on the ground of public policy; that is, that the adoption of the rule was calculated to promote the negotiability of commercial paper, by promoting confidence in its genuineness.

[New York General Term,

June 7, 1869.

Judgment reversed, and demurrer overruled.

Clerke, Ingraham and Sutherland, Justices.]

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.