Leather Manuf'Rs' Nat Bank v. Morgan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 163 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 186 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ While it is true that the relation of a bank and its depositor is one simply of debtor and creditor, and that the depositor is not chargeable with any payments except such as are made in conformity with his orders, it is within common knowledge that the object of a pass-book is to inform the depositor from time to time of the condition of his account as it appears upon the books of the bank. It not only enables him to discover errors to his prejudice, but supplies evidence in his favor in the event of litigation or dispute with the bank. In this way it operates to protect him against the carelessness or fraud of the bank. The sending of this pass-book to be written up and returned with the vouchers is therefore, in effect, a demand to know what the bank claims to be the state of his account. And the return of the book with the vouchers is the answer to that demand, and, in effect, imports a request by the bank that the depositor will, in proper time, examine the account so rendered, and either sanction or repudiate it.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gladstone Exchange Bank v. Keating · Grand Lodge of the Ancient Order of United Workmen v. State Bank

2. ““always necessary to such ah estoppel that there should be an intention, on the part of the person making a declaration or doing an act, to mislead the one who is induced to rely upon it. Indeed, it would limit the rule mueh within the reason of it if it were restricted to cases where there was an element of fraudulent purpose. In very many of the cases in which the rulé has been applied, there was no more than negligence on the part of him who was estopped.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis & Rankin Bldg. & Manuf'g Co. v. Dix · Edison Electric Light Co. v. Buckeye Electric Co.

3. “‘‘Of course, if the defendant’s officers, before paying the altered checks, could by proper care and skill have detected the forgeries, then it cannot receive a credit for the- amount of those checks, even if the depositor omitted all examination of his account.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Herbel v. Peoples State Bank · Coleman Drilling Co. v. First Nat. Bank of Burkburnett