Cottondale State Bank v. Oskamp Nolting Co.
Decision Date | 05 July 1912 |
Citation | 59 So. 566,64 Fla. 36 |
Parties | COTTONDALE STATE BANK v. OSKAMP NOLTING CO. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Jackson County; J. W. Perkins, Judge.
Action by the Oskamp Nolting Company against the Cottondale State Bank. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
There is no provision in either our state banking laws or in the federal banking laws that either expressly or by implication empowers such banks to guarantee the payment of a debt of a third party solely for his benefit, and any such agreement when attempted by them is ultra vires and void, and is not binding upon such bank when made by its cashier, since such cashier is not authorized to bind such bank by an agreement that is ultra vires as to such bank.
A bank is authorized to lend its money, but not its credit.
COUNSEL Calhoun & Campbell, of Marianna, for plaintiff in error.
Paul Carter, of Marianna, for defendant in error.
The defendant in error sued the plaintiff in error, the Cottondale State Bank, in the circuit court of Jackson county for the recovery of $150, upon the following written contract:
'Per Arthur Williams, Cashier.'
The defendant bank pleaded (1) that it did not contract as alleged; (2) that the alleged contract is not its contract.
The defendant bank before trial moved for leave to file the following additional plea:
'That the guarantee of Arthur Williams as cashier of the Cottondale State Bank was made by Arthur Williams without authority of law or the charter of said bank, and is not binding upon said bank,' but the court refused to permit said plea to be filed. At the trial, when the above contract of guaranty was offered in evidence by the plaintiffs, it was objected to by the defendant on the grounds 'that it is not shown that the Cottondale State Bank is a guaranty company, or has the right under its charter to guarantee the payment of debts of others, or that Arthur Williams, the then cashier of said bank, and the right to bind the bank as surety for the debts of another under the charter of the bank.' These objections were overruled, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wegner v. First National Bank of Casselton
...binding upon the bank except for benefits actually received. International Harvester Co. v. Upham (N.D.) 166 N.W. 507; Cottondale Bank v. Oskham Nolte Co. 59 So. 566; Third Nat. Bank v. Savings Bank, 244 Mo. 554, S.W. 495; Ayr v. Hughes, 87 S.C. 382, 69 S.E. 657; Norton v. Bank, 61 N.H. 589......
-
Am. Express Co. v. Citizens' State Bank
...26;Sturdevant Brothers & Co. v. Farmers' & Merchants' Bank, 62 Neb. 472, 87 N. W. 156;Id., 69 Neb. 220, 95 N. W. 819;Cottondale State Bank v. Oskamp M. Co., 64 Fla. 36, 59 South. 566, Ann. Cas. 1916D, 564;Greeley v. Nashua Sav. Bank, 63 N. H. 145;Willett v. Farmers' Sav. Bank, 107 Iowa, 69,......
-
American Express Co. v. Citizens State Bank, 181 Wis. 172 (WI 6/18/1923)
...57 N. E. 20; Sturdevant Bros. & Co. v. Farmers & M. Bank, 62 Neb. 472, 87 N. W. 156; S. C. 69 Neb. 220, 95 N. W. 819; Cottondale State Bank v. Oskamp N. Co. 64 Fla. 36, 59 South. 566; Greeley v. Nashua Sav. Bank, 63 N. H. 145; Willett v. Farmers Sav. Bank, 107 Iowa, 69, 77 N. W. 519; Laidla......
-
Lander State Bank v. Putnam, State Bank Examiner
... ... Bank ... v. Armstrong, 152 U.S. 346; Swofford Bros. v ... Bank, 81 Mo.App. 46; Bank v. Oskamp, 59 So ... 566; Bank v. Savings Bank, 149 S.W. 495; 1 Morse ... Bks. and Bkng. (6th Ed.) 472; ... ...