Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 U.S. 326 - Mechanics' Bank of Alexandria v. The Bank of Columbia

Mechanics' Bank of Alexandria v. The Bank of Columbia’s Empirical Analysis

18 U.S. 326 · 1820

Citation profile

103
cited by 103 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 69 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 103 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2017 · most notably Home Telephone Telegraph Company v. City of Los Angeles (1913), Fleckner v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States (1823)

6 federal appellate · 69 state decisions — followed in 27 states

19018201830184018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Hodgson v. Dexter

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 103 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “-It is enough, for the purposes of the defendant to establish that there existed on the face of the paper circumstances from which it might reasonably be inferred that it was either one or the other. In that case it became indispensable to res ' to extrinsic evidence to remove the doubt. The evidence resorted to for this purpose was the most obvious and reasonable possible, viz. that this was the appropriate form of an official check; that it was in fact cut out of the official check-book of the bank, and noted on the margin ; that the money was drawn in behalf of and applied to the use of tlie Mechanics’ Bank ; and. by all the banks, „and all the officers of the banks- through which it passed, recognized as an official transaction.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The question is whether a certain act, done by the cashier of a bank, was done in his official or individual capacity. Had the draft, signed by Patón, borne no marks of an official character on the face of it, the case would have presented more difficulty. But if marks of an official character not only exist on the face, but predominate, the case is really a very familiar one. Evidence to fix its true character becomes indispensable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ No. IS. Mechanics' Bank of Alexandria, June 25th, 1817. “ Cashier of the Bank of Columbia, “Pay to the order of P. H. Minor, Esq., ten thousand dollars. “$10,00U. Wm. Patón, Jr.’*”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.