State v. Hoffman
Citations
- 120 La. 949
- 45 So. 951
- 1908 La. LEXIS 594
Syllabus
<p>1. Indictment and Information — Mattees to be Pboved — Allegation on Prescription.</p> <p>The allegation that prescription has been interrupted by the filing of an indictment is affirmative in character, and must be proved like any other affirmative allegation.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Gent. Dig. vol. 27, Indictment and Information, §§ 527-531.]</p> <p>2. Banks and Banking — Ckiminal Responsibility — Receiving Deposits with Knowledge op Insolvency.</p> <p>Act No. 108 of 1884, p. 144, making it a crime for any officer of a banking institution to assent to the reception of deposits after he knows that the bank is insolvent, does not require that the officer should have charter authority for assenting to the deposit, but simply that he shall be an officer and shall assent; hence, in the prosecution of the cashier of a bank under said act, the question is not as to who, under the charter, had authority or was charged with duty in the premises, but simply whether or not, as a matter of fact, the defendant was cashier, and as such assented to the deposit; and, as a consequence, proof that the cashier in point of fact had the active management of the bank and assented to the deposit is admissible, regardless of what may have been the charter requirements, and such proof is in no wise contradictory of the charter confiding the management of the .bank to the board of directors, such charter provision can only be evidence of what should have been, and not for what actually was.</p> <p>3. Same — Question .fob Juby — Solvency op Bank.</p> <p>In such a prosecution, any estimate the State Examiner of State Banks may have made of the value of the assets of the bank is not conclusive upon the question of the solvency or Insolvency of the bank, which is a question of fact to be determined by the jury and not by the Bank Examiner.</p> <p>4. Same — Evidence—Admissibility.</p> <p>Upon the question of the probable value of the assets of the bank on the day the depo
Judges: Pbovosty
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. GreenSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1963-02-18· cited 66×
- State v. ScottSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1959-03-23· cited 26×
- State v. SullivanSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1977-11-14· cited 9×
- State v. TraylorSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1975-04-24· cited 8×
- State v. ToussandLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1983-09-19· cited 3×
- State v. DooleySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1953-07-03· cited 2×
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. VictorSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1884-12-15· cited 15×
- State v. FoleySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1904-06-20· cited 12×
- State v. JosephSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1888-01-15· cited 12×
- State v. PierreSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1897-06-14· cited 11×
- John Calder & Co. v. Their CreditorsSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1895-07-01· cited 6×
- Succession of MagiSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1901-11-15· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.