Branch v. U.S. Nat. Bank of Omaha
Decision Date | 03 February 1897 |
Citation | 50 Neb. 470,70 N.W. 34 |
Parties | BRANCH v. UNITED STATES NAT. BANK OF OMAHA ET AL. |
Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
1. The legal title of commercial paper indorsed “For collection” passes to the indorsee only so far as to enable him to demand and enforce payment thereon.
2. The owner of paper so indorsed may control the same until paid in full, and may intercept the proceeds thereof in the hands of an intermediate agent.
3. The mere crediting of the account of the remitting bank by a correspondent employed by it to make collections does not create, in favor of the latter, such an equity as can be interposed in defense of an action by the owner of the paper so collected for the proceeds thereof.
4. Evidence examined, and held insufficient to prove that the position of appellant, a subagent for the collection of commercial paper, has been altered to its damage through the placing of the proceeds of such paper to the credit of the bank from which it was received.
Appeal from district court, Lancaster county; Strode, Judge.
Action by Charles W. Branch against the United States National Bank of Omaha and others. From a judgment against it, the bank appeals. Affirmed.Cowin & McHugh, for appellant.
John S. Bishop, for appellee.
This was an equitable proceeding in the district court for Lancaster county, whereby the appellee, Charles W. Branch, seeks to recover the sum of $941.34 and interest, being the proceeds of a check drawn to his order by the Hamilton-Brown Shoe Company upon the Continental National Bank of St. Louis, under date of January 11, 1893. A final decree was by the district court rendered against the appellant the United States National Bank of Omaha, in accordance with the prayer of the petition, and dismissing the action as against the defendant Hayden, receiver of the Capital National Bank. The issues presented by the pleadings are fairly indicated by the findings of the district court, viz.: In addition to the facts as above found, it appears that the check in question was by the plaintiff indorsed in blank at the time of its delivery to the Capital National Bank for collection; that said check, when received by the United States National Bank, bore upon its face the following indorsement, “Report by this No. 15,227 Capital National Bank,” and was indorsed...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Branch v. United States National Bank of Omaha
... ... Nat. Bank, Lincoln: Your favor of the -- inst. is ... received, with stated enclosures. We credit * * * No. 15227, ... $ 941.34. We credit out of town ... it can, for reasons hereafter stated, have no application to ... the facts of the case before us. No mere book-keeping between ... a bank and its sub-agent for the collection of money can ... change the actual status of the parties, or destroy ... ...
-
Union Trust Co. v. Berry
... ... who was also the president of the Bank of Western Grove, sold ... 100 head of cattle belonging to ... the disposition thereof until it was paid in full. Branch ... Bank v. U. S. Nat. Bank of Omaha, 50 ... Neb. 470, 70 ... ...
-
Union Trust Co. v. Berry
...owner sending the paper for collection could have controlled the disposition thereof until it was paid in full. Branch v. U. S. Nat. Bank of Omaha, 50 Neb. 470, 70 N. W. 34. Magness, the president of the Western Grove bank, told Berry, the appellee, who was entitled to the money for which h......