BANKS AND BANKING - COUNTERMAND OF BANK DRAFTS

Authors

Michigan Law Review, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

Plaintiff purchased of defendant bank its draft on a correspondent bank, made payable to the order of the plaintiff, who indorsed it to a third party in part payment on a contract. Six days later, deciding that the contract was tainted with illegality, plaintiff requested defendant bank to stop payment on the draft. Defendant refused to do so unless the plaintiff posted a bond. A few days later the draft was paid. Plaintiff sought damages for defendant's refusal. Held, that although defendant bank could have countermanded the draft if it so chose, it was under no duty to do so, and the decision of the lower court in defendant's favor should be affirmed. Polotsky v. Artisans Savings Bank, (Del. 1936) 188 A. 63.

Recommended Citation

Michigan Law Review, BANKS AND BANKING - COUNTERMAND OF BANK DRAFTS, 35 Mich. L. Rev. 1167 (1937).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol35/iss7/11