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

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 206 U.S. 142, click here.

Yates v. Jones National Bank

No. 230

Argued March 8, 11, 1907
Decided May 13, 1907
206 U.S. 158

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA

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.