Meyer v. Indiana National Bank

Decision Date08 October 1901
Docket Number3,470
Citation61 N.E. 596,27 Ind.App. 354
PartiesMEYER ET AL. v. INDIANA NATIONAL BANK
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

From Marion Superior Court; J. L. McMasters, Judge.

Action by Solomon Meyer and others against Indiana Nat. Bank to recover amount of fraudulent check. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed.

W. R Gardiner, C. E. Barrett and E. A. Brown, for appellants.

N Morris and L. Newberger, for appellee.

OPINION

ROBY, J.

One Thomas B. Hornaday, represented to appellants that his name was Volney J. Dawson, that he owned certain real estate in Marion county, and by these and other representations which need not be repeated, but all of which were false and fraudulent, secured a loan of $ 600, giving a note and mortgage therefor by the assumed name. The amount so loaned was turned over by check upon appellee bank, payable in accordance with the signature of the note and mortgage. This check, Hornaday, alias Dawson, indorsed as payee, and presented for payment; he was identified as Hornaday, a long time resident of Indianapolis, again indorsed the check, this time by the name of Hornaday, and got the money. The check was duly charged and returned to appellant, and no question relative to its payment arose until long after. Six months later, Hornaday borrowed a second $ 600 in all respects duplicating the transaction described. Later still a gentleman, whose true name was Volney J. Dawson, and who did own the real estate described in the mortgage made by Hornaday, alias Dawson, discovered an apparent lien thereon. He promptly repudiated the entire transaction to which he was indeed in no sense, either directly or indirectly a party.

Appellants insist that the check was intended to be paid to Volney J Dawson, who owned the real estate mortgaged, and that the bank, having paid to the wrong person upon a forged indorsement, must make good the loss. The check was made to be paid. The appellee had no option except to pay it when presented or indorsed by the payee. Who was the payee? Not the true Volney J. Dawson; he had made no note, mortgaged no land, and had no right to receive payment of the check. There may have been a number of persons bearing the name in the city, but that accident gave none of them any right to receive payment. Names are merely used as one method of indicating identify of persons. Vernon Ins. Co. v. Glenn, 13 Ind.App. 340, 40 N.E. 759; Meridian Nat. Bank v. First Nat. Bank, 7 Ind.App. 322, 52 Am. St. 450, 33 N.E. 247; Aultman, Miller & Co. v. Timm, 93 Ind. 158.

The person to whom appellants ordered their funds to be paid was the one to whom the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 cases
  • Brown v. Nelms
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 23, 1908
    ...compliance with the statute. 23 Ark. 569; 31 Ark. 145; 70 Ark. 483; 8 Johns. 44; 1 Mees. & W. 113; 100 U.S. 239; 5 L. R. A. 342 and note; 61 N.E. 596; 25 Mo. Moore, Smith & Moore, W L. Terry and D. D. Terry, for appellee Nelms; Randolph & Randolph, of counsel. 1. The children were not named......
  • Russell v. Second Nat. Bank Of Paterson.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • October 21, 1947
    ...or credit for the named payee who was unknown to the drawer. United States v. National Bank, (C.C.) 45 F. 163; Meyer v. Indiana Bank, 27 Ind.App. 354, 61 N.E. 596; Emporia Bank v. Shotwell, 35 Kan. 360, 11 P. 141, 57 Am.Rep. 171; Robertson v. Coleman, 141 Mass. 231, 4 N.E. 619, 55 Am.Rep. 4......
  • United States v. First Nat. Bank of Prague, Okl., 2347.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • December 12, 1941
    ...National Bank, 126 Conn. 179, 10 A.2d 604; Robertson v. Coleman, 141 Mass. 231, 4 N.E. 619, 55 Am.Rep. 471; Meyer v. Indiana National Bank, 27 Ind. App. 354, 61 N.E. 596; McHenry v. Old Citizens' National Bank of Zanesville, 85 Ohio St. 203, 97 N.E. 395, 38 L.R. A.,N.S., 1111; Halsey v. Ban......
  • Vantine v. Butler
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • February 29, 1912
    ...77 Mo. 514; Long v. McDow, 87 Mo. 202; State v. Moore, 61 Mo. 279; Gitt v. Watson, 18 Mo. 277; Hoyt v. Davis, 21 Mo.App. 239; Meyer v. Bank, 27 Ind.App. 354; People v. Seaman, 239 Ill. 611. (7) The are admissible to prove not only matters of pedigree proper, such as relationship and descent......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT