Hoover v. Pursel

Citations

• 67 Pa. Super. 130
• 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 357

Syllabus

<p>Accord and satisfaction — Acceptance of property in place of money.</p> <p>A liquidated money demand may, with the consent of the parties,, be discharged by the delivery of property, or part property and a part money, and if received by the creditor in full discharge of the-, indebtedness, there is a good accord and satisfaction. It is immaterial whether the property represents an adequate payment.</p> <p>Warranty — Sale of promissory note.</p> <p>Where a receiver for an insolvent bank sells a promissory note of which it was the holder and assigns it “without recourse,” he is nevertheless liable if it appears that the only solvent party to the note had been released by the bank. In purchasing the note the buyers took their chances on the financial responsibility of the makers and endorsers, but had a right to rely upon the representation that they were legally liable.</p> <p>' Receivers — Banks and banking — Check—Endorsement of check by receiver — Accord and satisfaction.</p> <p>Where the officers of a bank as a part of a valid accord and satisfaction .accept a check from a debtor, and thereafter the bank becomes insolvent and a receiver is appointed, the action of the receiver in endorsing the check as “accepted by the payee in full payment of the within account,” is valid without any action of the court authorizing the receiver to compromise the claim.</p> <p>In such a case the agreement of compromise was the act of the officers of the bank before the receiver was appointed, and he was performing a ministerial duty in endorsing the check for collection, and was carrying out the bank’s part of an agreement which was executory as to it and executed as to the debtor. Such a compromise entered into as a contract before the receiver was appointed was binding upon him.</p>