Case ID: so2d_122/html/0211-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. CARROLL, CHAS., Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHICAGO, Appellant, v. MERCANTILE NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI BEACH, Appellee. NATIONAL SECURITY BANK OF CHICAGO, Appellant, v. MERCANTILE NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI BEACH, Appellee. CONTINENTAL ILLINOIS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHICAGO, Appellant, v. MERCANTILE NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI BEACH, Appellee.
    Nos. 59-754, 59-755, 59-756.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
    June 23, 1960.
    Rehearing Denied Aug. 19, 1960.
    Blackwell, Walker & Gray and Edward L. Magill, Miami, for appellants.
    Broad & Cassel, Miami Beach, and L. J. Cushman, Miami, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See First Nat. Bank of Portland v. United States Nat. Bank, 100 Or, 264, 197 P. 547, 14 A.L.R. 479, and Atlantic Nat. Bank of Jacksonville v. United States,, 5 Cir.1957, 250 F.2d 114.

HORTON, C. J., and ODOM, ARCHIE M., Associate Judge, concur.

CARROLL, CHAS., J., dissents.

CARROLL, CHAS., Judge

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent because I am of the opinion that there was a triable issue on a material matter on which the right to re-' cover under the second count depended, and that was whether there was negligence or fault on the part of the collecting bank which caused or contributed to the payment of the checks by the Chicago banks. See United States v. Chase National Bank, 252 U.S. 485, 494, 40 S.Ct. 361, 64 L.Ed. 675; Riggs National Bank of Washington, D. C. v. Dade Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n, 5 Cir.1959, 268 F.2d 951, 953.