Search Supreme Court Cases

SCAMMON V. KIMBALL, 92 U. S. 362 (1875)

U.S. Supreme Court

Scammon v. Kimball, 92 U.S. 362 (1875)

Scammon v. Kimball

92 U.S. 362


1. A banker, who was a director of an insurance company, can set off against its demand for money it deposited with him, bearing interest and payable on call, the amount due on its policies issued to and held by him.

2. The company having been adjudicated a bankrupt, his right to such a setoff is equally available against its assignee.

The complainant, a private banker in Chicago, held several policies of insurance issued to him by the Mutual Security Insurance Company, of which he was a director.

The company was duly adjudicated a bankrupt. At the time of such adjudication, it had money deposited with him on call, drawing interest, and held his notes for unpaid subscriptions to its capital stock.

The question arising in the case and determined by the court below was whether the amount due from the company on said policies of insurance on account of losses he had sustained by fire could be set off against said notes, and the money deposited.

In view of the decision in Sawyer v. Hoag, 17 Wall. 610, by this Court, the complainant's right to set off his claim against the company, so far as the notes in question are concerned, was abandoned in the argument.

Page 92 U. S. 363

Powered by Justia US Supreme Court Center: SCAMMON V. KIMBALL, 92 U. S. 362 (1875)

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.