The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
..
'~
--- ,r• ......
·.
,J'
X-3805
CoPY
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT ,OF APPEALS
FOURTH CIRCUIT
No ... 2106
F.EDERAL :RESERVE BANK OF RICHMOND,
Plaintiff in Error,
versus
D. J. MALLOY & J. H. MALLOY, trading as
MALLOY BROTHERS,
Defendants in Error.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District
of North Carolina,
{.Argued May 24, 1923 ..
a~
Raleigh.
becided July 12, 192})
_._
_____ ....__
Before WOODS and WADDILL, Circuit Judges, and GRONER, District Judge ..
M. G. WALLACE (J. C. LITTLE on brief) for Plaintiff in Error, and ROBERT H..
DYE (BRANCH & SNOW on brief) for Defendant in .Error.
WADDILL, Cireui t Judge:
This action was instituted in the
~erior
Court of Cumberland County,
North Carolina, by the defendants in error D. J. Malloy and J • .H. Malloy,
parters doing bl.Lsiness under the firm name of M3lloy Brothers, citizens of
the State of Georgia, against the plaintiff in error, the Federal Reserve
Bank; of Richmond, a corporation organiZed under the act of congress known
-
-2a.s the F&deral Reserve Act, and ·Napier 0:.
of Cumberland, North Carolina.
X-3805
n·.
l3alfou.r, a citizen a1)(l resident
!Lhe purpose of the suit wa.s to recover from
the plaintiff in error the sum of $9,000.00, the amount of a eerta.in check
drawn by the saicl Napier u·. G. :Balfour on the Lumberton Ridge Bank of
Lumberton, N.
c·.,
in favor of the defendants in error in pa.yuent of an
indebtedness due them by sa.id Balfour, secured upon rea~ e sta.te in Cumberland. County.
'l'he check bad been entl'U.Sted to plaintiff in error for
collection in due course of its ba.nking business, aDi the amount of Vlhic:h
was lost to defende.nts in error, a.s claimed by them, bf reason of the
neglige,nc:e and want of business ea.:re exercised by the plaintiff in error;
tne specific Charge being that plaintiff in error neglisently mailed said
check to the Lumberton Bank upon which it was drawn, which c:ilarged the
sa= to the a.ccount of Balfour, the drawer, Vlho had to his cred ~ t a.tnple
fundS to meet the check, and negligently accepted in pa.yn:ent therefor a.
draft drawn by the l3ank of Lumberton on \he Atlantic :Bank and Deposit
Company, of Greensboro, N.C.. , in favor of the Federal Reserve B8Dk ot
Richmond, the plaintiff in error, for said $9,000.00.
this draft wa.s not
paid when presenteO., for la.ck of funds, and the Llunberton Bank in a few
d.qs suspended, and a receiver wa.s appointed for it·. .Defendants in e%l'or
further a.verred that plaintiff in error carelessly
am
negligently omitted
to give them pompt and timel.r notice of the failure to receive the
allli3'Ullt
of said check sent it for collection. Yilich would have enal>led them to
collect the same, e.n4 tba.t the plaintiff in error was liable a.s well for
its negligance in forwarding sa.i4 check for $9,000-00 to the bank on which
it wa.s dra»m, a.s for accepting something other than moner therefor, wb.iC'h
proved
va.luele~s.
'l'be ca.se wa.e, b:V appropriate proceeding, removed to the Unite4Sta.tes
District
~urt
•.....
for the Eastern District of North Carolina., where the sane
.
'
.......
·'
'-'
X-3805
-3was docketed, duly matured, and issue joined upon the plea.dings.
.A tria.l
by jury wa.s wa.ived by written stipulation of parties by counsel duly filed,
and a.ll questions of la.w and fact submitted to the judge of the tria.l court
for determina.tion, all parties asking for findings of fact and judgrr..ent in
their fa:vor.
After full consideration, the court found in favor of the
defendants in error against the pla.intiff in error, and also found in
favor of the defendant Ba.lfour, and rendered judgment a.gainst the pla.intiff
in error.in fa:vor of the defendants in error for $9,000.00 with interest
and costs.
This writ of error is presented by the Federal
Richmond, to review and reverse this judgment.
r.~s.;rve
Bank of
The learned judge of the
court below made a. full and comprehensive finding of facts, the accura.cy
of which is conceded, and not challenged in a:ny ma.terial respect, a.nd upon
the facts thus a.scerta.ined, rendered the opinion and judgment sought to be
·reviewed and reversed. (Malloy Bros. vs. Federa.l He serve Bank, 281 Fed·. 997) ..
The a.ssignments of error raise in substance the question of whether
the district court erred in holding pla.intiff in error guilty of negligence in
the circumstances, and tha.t it wa.s without authority to receive in settlement of the check in its hands for collection, the draft accepted by i t
upon the .Atlantic Bank and Trust Company, the taking of which resulted in
the loss sued for.
,After most careful consideration, we find ourselves in full a.cco:rd with
the court below upon the fa.cts, if, indeed, it rna.y be said .tha.t there is any
real dispute about them, and wff accept the a.ble and comprehensive opinion
of the judge of the district court a.s containing a. clear and correct r&1'1ew
of the law properly a.pplica.ble to the ca.se, and neither desire nor deem it
' .l
--4-
X-3805
necessary to add anything to wha.t is thare said.
The decision of the district court will be a.ffirmed, with costs· ..
Affirmed..
@FedFRASER