The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
' ' COPY X-6197 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF IMAGO, Plaintiff, vs. No. E-8994 THE ASTORIA NATIONAL BAH, W. C. CRAWLEY, Receiver of the Astoria National Bank, and. THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, November 26, 1928. Defendants. John K. Kollock f o r P l a i n t i f f ; Wilbur, Beckett, Howell & Opperiheimer and. Albert C. Agnew, f o r defendants. McNARY, DISTRICT JUDGE: (Memo.) I t i s contended, that the Astoria National Bank paid the d r a f t in question by marking i t "Paid" and by depositing i n the United S t a t e s mail i t s w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n s d i r e c t i n g the Federal Reserve Bank to pay the d r a f t from i t s general deposit. A payment i s not complete u n t i l the obligation i s d i s charged. In t h i s case i t remained f o r the Federal Reserve Bank to receive the w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n s before i t was authorized to separ a t e the amount of the d r a f t from the deposit of the Astoria National Bank, and as t h i s a u t h o r i z a t i o n was not received by the o f f i c e r s of the Federal Reserve Bank before the insolvency of the Astoria National Bank, the payment was not completed. The authority giving the Federal Reserve Bank the r i g h t to t r a n s f e r funds from the reserve account of the Astoria National Bank to pay the p l a i n t i f f ' s d r a f t was revoked by the insolvency of the Astoria Bank. The a u t h o r i t i e s have recognized a payment as complete where a debtor has transmitted to h i s creditor a d r a f t or check through the mails by the c r e d i t o r ' s express direction, or where the course of dealings between the p a r t i e s has been such that an agreement could be inferred. In the case of McDonald, Receiver, v. Chemical National Bank, 174 U. S. 610, 620, the court says: 11 There was p l a i n l y a general agreement that remittances were to be made by mail, and that t h e i r proceeds were not to be returned to the Capital National Bank, but were to be credited to i t s constantly overdrawn account.*** I t i s s u f f i c i e n t , f o r present purposes, to say that the inference i s warranted that i t was understood between the p a r t i e s that these remittances were to be made through the mails, and that they were i n the nature of payments on general account." In that case the implied understanding grew out of frequent remittances from time to time during a long course of business between the banks concerned. But no understanding of l i k e e f f e c t can be i n f e r r e d in t h i s case. The demurrer w i l l be sustained. 1 8 8
@FedFRASER