Omaha daily bee., 1903-06-16
SUPREME COURT SYLLABI

10000. Sturdevant Brothers against Far
ror. Douglas. Former judgment adhered
i. The power Of n corporation to make
valid contracts Is measured by Its char
ter; and the scope OF the authority OF its
officers and agents acting for IL is limited
and person dealing with such corporation
ls chargeabie with notice of such limita-
tions
Q Where tho cashier Of a banking cor
poration has attempted to- ooiigate the bank *
an action between third parties In con-
troversy over tho right Of possession OF
the property replevined. and there is moth
ing In the record other than the act OF
executing and undertaking from which II
may be inferred that the corporation was
interested In the subject matter of the con
troversy, or that the undertaking was ex-
ecuted with q view to furthering the in
terests and business of the corporation for
which II was created the only presumption
fairly arising from such state of facts
is that the corporation has no interest In
the controversy and attempted to opligate
OF the plaintiff in the replevin action.
8. A banking corporation organized to do
business the nature of which shall be
banking in all its branches including the
buying and selling of United states bonds
and municipal and other securities. the
loaning of money on personal and collat-
eral security and also on real estate
curty on regular banking time. the buying
and selling OF bills of exchange, promis-
sorry notes, mortgages, tax certificates, tax
titles and other business usually transacted
by bank or banker" not being author
lied or empowered to pledge its credit as
a matter OF accommodation by executing
undertakings In judicial proceedings, per-
son dealing with such corporation is not
warranted In indulging in the presumption
that the cashier Of the bank is authorized
to obligate the corporation as surety on n
rreplevin undertaking in an action between
third parties, merely because under some
possible circumstances, the corpora ton
would be empowered to execute such under
taking in the furtherance of its own in
TaFaStS and IN the ACCOMPLISHMENT of the
objects the power to perform which was
granted by its charter ns Incorporation.
4. The signing OF such an undertaking
as surety thereon by the cashier acting for
the corporation In an action between third
parties in which the bank to all outward
appearances has no interest is not an act
within the apparent scope OF the authority
OF the cashier in the performance of his
duties such officer.
g. The execution by the cashier OF a
banking corporation on behalf OF his prin-
cipal. OF a replevin undertaking as surety
in an action between third parties although
1t may not be illegal under any and all
circumstances, is so much out of and be-
yond the general scope of the business of
such corporation and the authority of the
cashier as to require those dealing with
the corporation and accepting and ac-
quiescing In such undertaking as suficient
was empowered and the cashier authorized
to execute such an undertaking.
g. The judgment heretofore rendered In
this cause, sturdevant ct al against Far
mers and Merchants Bank of Rushville,
ct al, Nebraska. 81 N. W. Rep. 156. ad-
The following opinions will be onlcialiy
reported:
i047S Youngston against Bond. Appeal
from Kearney. Former judgment adhered
to. Pound, c., division No. 2.
/. Where a suit in equity is to be re-
garded as part of the proceedings for set
tlement of the estate of deceased person,
1t must be brought in the county court,
which has exclusive original jurisdiction oI
such matters.
2. Hence a suit by an administrator with
the will annexed for construction of the
will in order to enable him to administer
the estate properly, is not maintainable In
the first instance In the district court.
3. 1t seems that a distinction Is to be
drawn between such a case and suit by
trustees under a will after settlement oI
the estate, to obtain a construction of the
provisions of the will relating to their trust,
brought In the district court.
T. Section Is. article vi of the constitu-
ton does not preclude a county court from
constituting will in a proper case, and de-
termining the effect and meaning OF a de-
wise of land so far is necessary to give
proper directions TO an executor or admin
lstrator with the will annexed.
5. The construction of the will in such
a case Is for the information and benefit
OF such executor or administrator only, In
order to advise him what course to pur-
sue. II adtudicates nothing beyond his
rights and liabilities in the execution OF his
office; controversies between adverse claim
ants under the devise or between the ex-
ecutor or administrator and persons claim
ing adversely to the estate will not be