Majority
p. 294CASALE et al. v. GUION et al. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. April 23, 1909.) Argued before WOODWARD, JENKS, GAYNOR, BURR, and RICH, JJ.
Headnote
Banks and Banking (§ 73[1] )—Private Bankers—Insolvency—Authority op Cashier.The general authority of private bankers’ cashier to transact business for them ceased with their insolvency, and hence he could not validly deliver a note for them.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Banks and Banking, Dec. Dig. § 73.*]
Appeal from Municipal Court of City of New York.
Action by Salvatore Casale and another against Harry Guión and another. Judgment dismissing the complaint, and plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
M. V. McDonald, for appellants.
Harry Zirn, for respondents.
When the plaintiffs undertook to show title in the promissory note, they were confronted by the fact that they relied upon a naked delivery of the note to them by the cashier of private bankers after those bankers had failed. We think that the cashier’s general authority to transact business for his principals had ceased. Bolles on Banking, § 807. The court was right in dismissing the complaint. If the plaintiffs sue again, there may be a further question of attempted preference, which is not presented, by the record before us sufficiently for any present discussion.
The judgment of the Municipal Court is affirmed, with costs.