Yates v. Jones National Bank
206 U.S. 158 (1907)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Yates v. Jones National Bank, 206 U.S. 158 (1907)

Yates v. Jones National Bank

No. 230

Argued March 8, 11, 1907

Decided May 13, 1907

206 U.S. 158

Syllabus

If one of the plaintiffs in error does not furnish a cost bond, appear by counsel, or file any brief in this Court, he will be presumed to have abandoned the prosecution of the writ and it will be dismissed as to him.

Where, in the trial and appellate courts, an immunity was claimed under 5239, Rev.Stat., as to the rule of liability to be applied to directors of a national bank and such immunity was denied, this Court has jurisdiction to review the judgment under section 709, Rev.Stat., even if in other respects it might not have jurisdiction.

Where a statute creates a duty and prescribes a penalty for its nonperformance, the rule prescribed by the statute is the exclusive test of liability.

The National Banking Act, as embodied in 5239, Rev.Stat., affords the exclusive rule by which to measure the right to recover damages from directors based upon a loss resulting solely from their violation of a duty expressly imposed upon them by a provision of the act, and that liability cannot be measured by a higher standard than that imposed by the act.

Where, by a statute, a responsibility is made to arise from its violation knowingly, proof of something more than negligence is required, and that the violation was in effect intentional.

105 N.W. Rep. 287, reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 206 U. S. 162

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.