Union Bank v. Laird

Citation15 U.S. 390,2 Wheat. 390,4 L.Ed. 269
PartiesThe UNION BANK of Georgetown v. LAIRD
Decision Date15 March 1817
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

At this time, also, James Patton had another debt pending in the bank. Being one of the original subscribers to the bank, for the above-mentioned 50 shares of stock, he borrowed of the bank, in January, 1811, the sum of 1,500 dollars, and to enable him to obtain the loan, procured Marsteller and Young, and the defendant, Laird, to become his endorsers. This loan was renewed from time to time, and was continued, without any default of payment, until about the 29th of July, 1811.

On the 26th of March, 1811, Patton obtained from the officers of the bank a certificate of his 50 shares of stock, and on that day delivered it to the defendant, Laird, to secure him, as it was alleged, against his endorsement for Patton.

On the 10th of July, 1811, Patton executed a power of attorney, authorizing the defendant, Laird, to make a transfer of his stock; and on the 22d of August, 1811, he executed a deed of assignment to the defendant, Laird, of his stock: but as this assignment was not made upon the books of the bank, it was not considered a valid assignment, according to the rules of the bank.

Laird, considering himself entitled to the benefit of these shares, under the circumstances applied to the bank to transfer upon their books the shares for his own benefit. But the bank, upon the ground that the acceptance which Patton had failed to pay operated as a lien upon those shares, refused to suffer the transfer to be made until that debt was paid.

Laird, some time after this refusal, to wit, on the 22d of February, 1812, pald the 1,500 dollars, for which he was endorser for Patton, reserving, nevertheless, his equitable claim upon the stock, and then instituted this suit in chancery, against the Union Bank, to compel them to suffer the transfer to be made on their books for his benefit, and to account with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
56 cases
  • Davis v. Rossi
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 20, 1930
    ...6 Beavan, 321; Weale v. Ollive, 17 Beavan, 253; Beech v. Keep, 18 Beavan, 285; Coningham v. Plunkett, 2 Young & Colyer, 244; Union Bank v. Laird, 2 Wheat. 390; Oxford Turnpike v. Bunnel, 6 Conn. 558; Perry on Trusts (7 Ed.) sec. 100, pp. 126-127. (14) The grantor cannot, by deed to third pa......
  • Wilson v. St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 22, 1891
    ...Rep. 419. The precise question in the case at bar has never been before the United States supreme court for adjudication; but see Bank v. Laird, 2 Wheat. 390; Black v. Zacharie, 3 How. 483; Bank v. Lanier, 11 Wall. 369; Johnston v. Laflin, 103 U. S. 800; Iron Co. v. Lissberger, 116 U. S. 8,......
  • Davis v. Rossi
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 20, 1930
    ... ... 130; Blake v. Life ... Ins. Co., 209 Fed. (8 C. C. A.) 314; Hemmerich v ... Union Sav. Inst., 205 N.Y. 369. (6) The real intention ... of the grantor, as expressed by his actions, ... Aldridge v. Aldridge, 202 Mo. 565; Eschen v ... Steers, 10 F.2d 742; Dunn v. Bank, 109 Mo. 100 ... (10) The attempted trust was voluntary and not completely ... executed. (a) ... Plunkett, 2 Young & Colyer, 244; Union Bank v ... Laird, 2 Wheat. 390; Oxford Turnpike v. Bunnel, ... 6 Conn. 558; Perry on Trusts (7 Ed.) sec. 100, ... ...
  • United Cigarette Mach. Co. v. Winston Cigarette Mach. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • March 7, 1912
    ... ... 520 et seq.; 2 Thomp.Corps. 2322, 2327; 3 ... Thomp.Corps. 3247; 10 Cyc. 580; Union Bank v. Laird, 2 ... Wheat. 390, 4 L.Ed. 269; Bohmer v. Bank, 77 Va ... That ... ...
  • 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