Bank of California v. J. L. Mott Iron Works

Citations

• 113 Cal. 409
• 45 P. 674
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 803

Syllabus

<p>Interpleader — Collection of Note by Bank—Conflicting Claims — Ownership of Note —Garnishment — Presumption — Evidence — Support of Judgment.—In an action of interpleader brought by a bank, which collected a note assigned by a plumbing company to one of the defendants, who forwarded it to the bank for collection on his account, and which was also alleged to have been garnished at suit of a creditor of the plumbing company in respect to the money collected on the note, in which action the assignee of the note and the attaching creditor interpleaded, it must be presumed, prima facie, that the holder of the note who sent it to the bank for collection was the owner thereof, though such presumption might be overcome by counter-evidence; and a judgment in favor of the attaching creditor against the holder of the note cannot be supported where there is no proof that the writ of attachment issued or was served upon the bank.</p> <p>Id.—Inadmissible Evidence — Letter from One Bank to Another.— Where the note was forwarded by the owner to one bank for collection, which in turn forwarded it for collection to another bank, a letter from the latter bank to the former is not admissible evidence against the holder of the note.</p>