Farmers’ Nat. Bank of Arkansas City v. Robinson
| Decision Date | 08 July 1898 |
| Citation | 53 P. 762,59 Kan. 777 |
| Parties | FARMERS’ NAT. BANK OF ARKANSAS CITY v. ROBINSON et al. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Error from district court, Cowley county; J. A. Burnette, Judge.
Action by George W. Robinson, receiver of the First National Bank of Arkansas City, and another, against the Farmers’ National Bank of Arkansas City. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error. Affirmed.
C. L Swarts and M. L. Howe, for plaintiff in error.
Pollock & Lafferty, for defendants in error.
Stauber & Uhl Building Company contracted to erect a government building on the Chilocco Indian reservation. Payment for the same was to be made on estimates or vouchers executed by the superintendent in charge of the work. To secure means with which to carry on the work, the building company arranged with the First National Bank of Arkansas City to advance the necessary money, and to secure the bank the building company would, when the estimates were executed deliver the same to the bank, and the bank would forward the estimates to Washington, where it was arranged they should be collected by Clum & Dingman, who were authorized by the building company and the bank to present the estimates obtain warrants on the United States treasury thereon, and forward the warrants to the bank. As the warrants or drafts would be payable to the building company, it was agreed that when they were returned to the bank they should be indorsed by the building company, and the bank would then apply the same on the indebtedness of the building company. This course was pursued. Several estimates were executed, delivered to the bank, forwarded to Washington, warrants on them issued, and returned to the bank, which were indorsed, and applied on loans made by the bank to the building company. Two estimates, amounting to $4,155.30, were issued and delivered to the bank on May 23, 1893, credited to the building company, and forwarded to Clum & Dingman for presentation and draft on the United States treasury. At that time the building company was indebted to the bank for moneys advanced under the agreement in the sum of $20,000. On June 15, 1893, the First National Bank suspended, and Hiram Walworth was temporarily placed in charge of the same. On June 17, 1893, the warrant on the treasury for the sum of $4,155.30 was received from Clum & Dingman by the cashier of the First National Bank, who requested Stauber, president of the building company, to indorse the same, and then delivered the warrant to Walworth, at the same time explaining the interest which the bank had therein. On...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Anthony
...(1901); Farmers' Nat. Bank of Arkansas City, Kansas v. Robinson, 176 U.S. 681, 682, 20 S.Ct. 1027, 44 L.Ed. 637 (1900), aff'g59 Kan. 777, 53 P. 762, 763 (1898); Gold–Mining Co. v. Nat. Bank, 96 U.S. 640, 642, 24 L.Ed. 648 (1877). If those statutes are violated, it is “for the government, an......
-
National Bank of Commerce of Seattle v. Downie
... ... DOWNIE et al. (two cases). SEATTLE NAT. BANK v. SAME (two cases). Nos. 1,527, 1,528, 1,529, ... York v. Conde, 147 N.Y ... 486, 42 N.E. 193; Farmers' National Bank v ... Robinson, 59 Kan. 777, 53 P. 762 ... ...
-
Hegness v. Chilberg
... ... In ... National Bank of Commerce v. Downie, 161 F. 839, ... 843, 88 ... 486, 42 N.E. 193, and Farmers' National Bank v ... Robinson, 59 Kan. 777, 53 ... ...
-
Rauh v. Oliver
... ... should have been sustained. (Fidelity Nat. Bank of ... Spokane v. Henley, 24 Wash. 1, 63 ... 870, 29 ... L.Ed. 940. See, also, Farmers' Nat. Bank v. Robinson, 59 ... Kan. 777, 53 P ... App. 187, 53 P. 391; Vincent v. City of ... Pacific Grove, 102 Cal. 405, 36 P. 773.) ... ...