Case Name: Roxanna Kelley, App'lt, v. Ann Augusta Foster et al., Adm'rs, Impl'd, Resp'ts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-02-10
Citations: 30 N.Y. St. Rep. 353
Docket Number: 
Parties: Roxanna Kelley, App’lt, v. Ann Augusta Foster et al., Adm’rs, Impl’d, Resp’ts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 30
Pages: 353–356

Head Matter:
Roxanna Kelley, App’lt, v. Ann Augusta Foster et al., Adm’rs, Impl’d, Resp’ts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed February 10, 1890.)
Banks—Accounting on liquidating cashiek.
In an action by stockholders of a bank to compel an accounting by the cashier who was the liquidator of its affairs, the latter cannot be held liable for the amount of a note merely because it was entered in the bills receivable book, in the absence of proof that it had been paid, and especially where ten years has elapsed since the last payment by him to the stockholders.
Appeal from judgment dismissing complaint.
Appellant has title to 1640 shares of stock of the Croton River ¡National Bank, through mesne assignments from James F. Kelley, the former president of the bank This action is brought in behalf of herself and other shareholders who may join therein ^ against the administrators of Francis E. Foster, deceased (the bank being joined as a defendant), to have an account taken of the moneys of the bank received by said Foster after it went into* liquidation and not paid over or accounted for, and of any indebtedness or liability of said Foster to the bank, and of the assets belonging to the bank. The complaint also prays that a receiver be appointed to receive the moneys, if any, that may be found due on such accounting, and to sell and convert into money the other assets of the bank, and that the appellant and said other shareholders may be paid their proportion of the amount found on such accounting, and of the avails of said assets, etc.
The court sent the case to Ambrose Eyder, Esq., to take the account prayed for, and to report the amount, if any, that might-be found due the appellant on such accounting!
The referee reported that said Foster had received and not accounted for certain specified sums, amounting with interest to $39,891.74, of which there was due to the appellant $9,912.43r and also reported assets belonging to the bank, consisting of a balance of $1,029.86, remaining in the First National Bank of Brewsters, of a deposit made by said Foster of moneys of the defendant bank, and of $20.74 cash found in one of the bank’s safes, and two safes, the appellant’s share of said deposit being $844.08.
The decision of the trial justice dismissed the complaint for the sole reason he finds no direct testimony to charge Mr. Foster’s estate with the payment of the claims set up in this action.
William A. Abbott, for app’lt; Calvin Frost, for resp’ts.

Opinion:
Barnard, P. J.
In May, 1874, the Croton Biver National Bank went in voluntary liquidation. Francis E. Foster was the cashier of the bank. He collected the assets and paid the debts-of the bank and paid to the stockholders the full par value of the-shares and twenty-five per cent, beyond. The last payment was made December 11, 18/6.
Foster died in November, 1886. There was no question made-as to the failure of the cashier to pay over all he had received during his life, something over twelve years after the bank went into liquidation, and nearly ten years after the last payment to the stockholders. Every intendment is in favor of the cashier after this lapse of time and long silence of the stockholders.
The proof fails to show that the deceased cashier ever collected moneys which he has not accounted, for. On December 23, 1873, a note was made by one Howes for $5,708.07, due in six months, with interest. There is no proof the note was ever paid to the bank and there is no proof connecting the bank with it-except that it is entered as bills receivable in the bills receivable book of the bank.
The note belonged to the plaintiff and the deceased cashier unless the bank discounted it, and this is not proven by the entry of the bills receivable book. This account does not show that the note was paid. It was the habit of the bank officers, when ever a bill receivable was paid, to enter the amount on a ticket stating from whom it was received. This proof is equally inconclusive as to the note called the town hall note. The claim is based upon a memorandum found in the safe of the bank in the cashier's handwriting. There is nothing upon the memoranda to create a personal liability upon the cashier. They are wholly insufficient and inconclusive and in the absence of proof explaining them, mean nothing. The fact that a bank book, which of necessity is more or less in the handwriting of the cashier, creates a liability personally upon him as if he was responsible for all credits which appear upon the book to have been received, will be too severe a rule as between the bank and its officers. The whole truth would need the other books of the bank. These are the chief items relied upon. The proof fails to establish them as against the cashier.
The judgment should, therefore, be affirmed, with costs.
Pratt, J., concurs.