Talk:First National Bank of Montgomery v. Daly

False Statement

In the section discussing the plaintiff's disbarment and criminal convictions the following statement is made as if true, "This is correct under a de jure Constitutional republic. Under the de facto corporate usurping system, it is considered frivolous". This is actually a statement consistent with Jerome Daly's position and representative of the notorious "common law movement" which advances this ideology. It is not a statement of the law as was decided by the courts and appears to be planted by someone seeking to use Wikipedia to promote their right-wing ideology. I recommend its deletion. LAWinans (talk) 22:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

What was case about?

The opening paragraph says: "The decision in that case, although it was ultimately reversed, is sometimes cited by opponents of the United State banking system." But it doesn't say what the decision was. Please help those of use who don't want to read past the opening paragraphs to learn what this subject is about. Thanks! ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest, but the decision (like most decisions) can't be summarized in half a sentence. The entire article is only a few paragraphs long; I think people should be able to read that much to if they want to understand the background, issues, decision, and outcome. --MelanieN (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN

Around April 2017, an anonymous user corrupted this article, beginning with this edit: [1], with a lot of unsourced nonsense. The user's edits contradicted the sources. I restored the article. Famspear (talk) 18:48, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

PS: The user in question went so far as to insert a false quotation from a court, trying to make it appear that the court said essentially the very opposite of what the court ruled. Famspear (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on First National Bank of Montgomery v. Daly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100131051943/http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/creditriver.html to http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/creditriver.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091002101309/http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/CreditRiver/CreditRiver.html to http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/CreditRiver/CreditRiver.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)