BRISCOE v. BANK OF KENTUCKY

Print this Page
Case Basics
Petitioner 
Briscoe
Respondent 
Bank of Kentucky
Opinion 
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Kentucky authorized a state owned and operated bank to issue bank notes that circulated as currency. The bank gave Briscoe the notes in exchange for a promissory note. Briscoe failed to repay, so the bank sued him. Briscoe claimed that the bank (and thus Kentucky) had violated the Constitution.

Question 

By issuing notes and currency, did the bank violate the constitutional prohibition in Article I Section 10 that "[n]o State shall...emit Bills of Credit"?

Conclusion 

The Court rejected Briscoe's argument. The clause prohibiting bills of credit applied to notes issued indirectly through a corporation. But the bank had issued the notes on its own credit, not on the credit of the state.

Cite this Page
BRISCOE v. BANK OF KENTUCKY. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 04 April 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1837/1837_2>.
BRISCOE v. BANK OF KENTUCKY, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1837/1837_2 (last visited April 4, 2014).
"BRISCOE v. BANK OF KENTUCKY," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed April 4, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1837/1837_2.