Lamb v. . Hood, Comr.

171 S.E. 359, 205 N.C. 409, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 570

Opinion

Pee CueiaM.

We do not perceive that the plaintiff’s claim upon any approved theory can be preferred to claims of the general creditors of the bank. Hunt’s Stores, Incorporated, made a general deposit of its funds and the bank did not receive them for the particular purpose of paying the draft in question or, indeed, for any other specific purpose. Corporation Commission v. Trust Co., 193 N. C., 696. The deposit, therefore, was not impressed with the quality of a trust, as in Parker v. Trust Co., 202 N. C., 230, and Flack v. Hood, 204 N. C., 337. The claim is not entitled to a statutory preference under C. S., 218(c) (14) for the reason that the Bank of Clinton did not charge the draft to the account of the drawer; and if the bank’s failure to return the draft within twenty-four hours after its receipt by mail implied an acceptance under the provisions of C. S., 3118 and 3119, such acceptance did not ipso facto create a preference. Judgment

Reversed.