Commonwealth v. Provident Life & Trust Co.

1 Pa. D. & C. 509, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 88
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
DecidedMay 5, 1922
DocketNo. 4578
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Pa. D. & C. 509 (Commonwealth v. Provident Life & Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Provident Life & Trust Co., 1 Pa. D. & C. 509, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 88 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1922).

Opinion

Martin, P. J.,

A petition was filed by the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, pursuant to the Act approved May 16, 1919, P. L. 177, to procure payment into the State Treasury, to the credit of the Commonwealth without escheat, of certain unclaimed moneys held as a depository by the Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia, which moneys are escheatable under the provisions of the Act approved June 7,1915, P. L. 878, and the supplements thereto, in that they consist of deposits which have neither been increased nor decreased within fourteen years prior to Jan. 1, 1920; and no interest credited to the depositors; and of certain other moneys held and possessed in a fiduciary capacity under a dry trust or under an active trust that has terminated, the beneficial owners and their whereabouts having been unknown for seven years; and of dividends declared but not paid for three or more years; also debts and interest due to creditors not paid for three years; also property held by the company for the benefit of other persons, which has been demandable for seven years, but not received by such persons.

Lists, certified to be correct by the Auditor General of the deposits and of the debts reported to him, are attached to the petition, and it is averred that he had given notice by mail and advertisement to the owners or persons entitled to claim the moneys as required by section 6 of the Act of 1915, as amended by section 3 of the Act of July 6,1917, P. L. 725, and that one year has elapsed, affording sufficient time since said notice and advertisement to enable the owners or persons interested to claim their money or property.

It is averred in the petition that the number and nature of the items of the money and property reported to the Auditor General are such that it is desirable, in the opinion of the Auditor General, that proceedings be instituted to procure the payment of the moneys into the State Treasury, to the credit of the Commonwealth without escheat, and to procure the sale of the property and payment of the proceeds into the State Treasury in conformity with the provisions of the Act approved May 16, 1919, P. L. 177, and that the Auditor General accordingly suggested to the Attorney-General that he proceed in the matter.

The petition prays that a day be set for a hearing, and notice be given the Provident Life and Trust Company; that after the hearing the court order all the unclaimed money appearing from the list attached to the petition, together with the accrued interest, to be paid into the State Treasury, to the credit of the Commonwealth, without escheat, and that the unclaimed chattels [510]*510and securities appearing in the list be sold in such manner as the court may direct and the proceeds paid into the State Treasury, to the credit of the Commonwealth, except moneys, securities or chattels claimed by or paid to persons lawfully entitled thereto, or' not subject to escheat, or to the jurisdiction of the court. A list of deposits, which have neither been increased nor decreased, and interest on which has not been credited in the pass-book of the depositor for fourteen or more consecutive years; and a list of debts and interest on debts due to creditors and not paid for three or more successive years, including interest accumulated, but not paid to the beneficiaries, on funds held as trustee, guardian, committee, executor, administrator, assig-nee, receiver or other fiduciary, the principal distributive sums of which trust funds have been paid to the respective beneficiaries are attached to the petition, together with the certificate of the Auditor General.

Upon filing the petition with proof of service of a copy upon the Provident Life and Trust Company, the court fixed a date for hearing, notice of which was duly served.

The Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia filed an answer, alleging that its corporate title was “The Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia,” but neither admitting nor denying that the moneys specified in the petition are escheatable under the provisions of the Act of Assembly approved June 7, 1915, P. L. 878, and the supplements thereto, and praying that proof of the allegations of the petition be made, if necessary, to the proper determination of the cause. The answer neither admits nor denies that respondent held or possessed in a fiduciary capacity any moneys which are escheatable under the provisions of the Act approved June 7, 1915, P. L. 878, and the supplements thereto. It is denied that respondent has in its possession any dividends or profits declared to its stockholders or members and not paid for three years or more next preceding Jan. 1, 1920; or that there are any debts due by respondent or interest on debts to creditors not paid for a period of three years next preceding Jan. 1, 1920; or that it holds any property for the benefit of persons which has been demandable by such persons for seven or more years next preceding-Jan. 1, 1920, which has not been received by such persons, except as set forth in the reports made by respondent to the Auditor General, as required by law. Respondent admits that the moneys and property specified in the schedules to the petition annexed have been reported to the Auditor General under its proper corporate title of The Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia, but neither admits nor denies that the Auditor General has given notice to the owners or persons entitled to claim the money, or that a sufficient time has elapsed since said notice and advertisement to enable the owners or persons to claim their respective moneys or property, and prays that proof of such notice be made by petitioner at the hearing of the cause. It was admitted by respondent that the exhibits annexed to the petition are true and correct reports made in pursuance of the act of assembly to the Auditor General, but respondent denies that any unclaimed chattels or securities were included in the exhibits. Respondent reserved the right to pay over to properly entitled claimants such money, securities and chattels as might appear at the hearing to have been claimed by and paid or delivered to the persons lawfully entitled thereto between the filing of the petition and the date of the hearing, and such moneys, chattels and securities as might be claimed at the hearing by the persons entitled thereto, or not subject to escheat, or to the jurisdiction of the court, and submitted itself to such order as the court might make in the premises.

[511]*511The regulation of title and devolution of property within its limits, and the rules of evidence for the ascertainment of facts in its courts and the establishment of legal presumptions, are within the control and jurisdiction of the State: Cunnius v. School District, 206 Pa. 469.

The 1st section of the Act of May 16, 1919, P. L. 177, directs that, when money is held by a bank or association which is escheatable, the Auditor General shall suggest that the Attorney-General proceed to obtain the money after notice and advertisement as required by the act under which such items are escheatable, which is the Act of June 7,1915, P. L. 878, the 6th section of which, as amended by the 4th section of the Act of April 21, 1921, P. L.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Provident Institution for Savings v. Malone
221 U.S. 660 (Supreme Court, 1911)
Cunnius v. Reading School District
56 A. 16 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1903)
Commonwealth v. Dollar Savings Bank
102 A. 569 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1917)
Germantown Trust Co. v. Powell
108 A. 441 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Pa. D. & C. 509, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-provident-life-trust-co-pactcomplphilad-1922.