Heckstall v. Citizens Bank of Windsor
163 S.E. 107, 202 N.C. 350, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 500
Opinion
Tbe principal questions in controversy were whether the deposit was general or special and whether the plaintiff was entitled to a preference in the administration of the bank’s assets. In effect the jury found that the deposit was special and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the value of the bonds. We have considered all the assignments of error and find no error. Corporation Commission v. Trust Co., 193 N. C., 696; Parker v. Central Bank and Trust Company, ante, 230.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Heckstall v. Citizens Bank of Windsor, 163 S.E. 107, 202 N.C. 350, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 500 (N.C. 1932).
163 S.E. 107 (Heckstall v. Citizens Bank of Windsor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Corp. Commission v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.
138 S.E. 22 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)