Lashorn v. First State Bank

Montana Supreme Court

Lashorn v. First State Bank

243 P. 573, 75 Mont. 184, 1926 Mont. LEXIS 20

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 18, 1926

DocketNo. 5,807.

StatusPublished

This text of 243 P. 573 (Lashorn v. First State Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lashorn v. First State Bank, 243 P. 573, 75 Mont. 184, 1926 Mont. LEXIS 20 (Mo. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

MR. JUSTICE MATTHEWS

delivered the opinion of tbe court.

M. H. Lashorn, as treasurer of tbe Co-ordinate Bodies of tbe Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, of Livingston, Orient of Montana, sought to compel tbe allowance of bis claim for tbe amount tbe lodge bad on deposit at the time tbe defendant bank became insolvent, as a preferred claim. Issue was joined, and a trial thereon bad, resulting in a judgment in favor of tbe defendants, from which judgment plaintiff has appealed.

Tbe facts adduced on tbe trial are identical with those in tbe the case of W. H. Pethybridge, as guardian, against these defendants (ante, p. 173, 243 Pac. 569), except as to tbe capacity of plaintiff, and that the original deposits were on time, and for which certificates of deposit were issued, and that in this case there is no intimation that plaintiff did not have authority from tbe lodge for all that be did, or that any one of bis acts was in violation of rule or regulation of tbe lodge or of any law of tbe state of Montana.

It affirmatively appears from tbe record that, at tbe time tbe deposits were made, there was no agreement or understanding between plaintiff and tbe bank that tbe deposits should constitute special deposits.

1. Deposits of funds for a specified time, and for which certificates of' deposit are issued, constitute general deposits, and, “tbe bank becoming insolvent, tbe depositor must be remitted to tbe position of a general creditor.” (2 Micbie on Banks & Banking, sec. 152.)

2. Counsel for plaintiff contends that, as tbe funds de posited by plaintiff were trust funds in bis bands, their deposit in a bank having notice of this fact constituted a special deposit, and whether tbe deposit was rightfully or *186 wrongfully made, the funds may be followed into the hands of the defendant receiver. As pointed out in the Pethybridge Case above, this contention is untenable, and, on the authority of that case, the judgment herein must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Affirmed.

Mb. Chief Justice Callaway and Associate Justices Hol. loway, Galen and Stark concur.

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

MR. JUSTICE MATTHEWS

delivered the opinion of tbe court.

M. H. Lashorn, as treasurer of tbe Co-ordinate Bodies of tbe Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, of Livingston, Orient of Montana, sought to compel tbe allowance of bis claim for tbe amount tbe lodge bad on deposit at the time tbe defendant bank became insolvent, as a preferred claim. Issue was joined, and a trial thereon bad, resulting in a judgment in favor of tbe defendants, from which judgment plaintiff has appealed.

Tbe facts adduced on tbe trial are identical with those in tbe the case of W. H. Pethybridge, as guardian, against these defendants (ante, p. 173, 243 Pac. 569), except as to tbe capacity of plaintiff, and that the original deposits were on time, and for which certificates of deposit were issued, and that in this case there is no intimation that plaintiff did not have authority from tbe lodge for all that be did, or that any one of bis acts was in violation of rule or regulation of tbe lodge or of any law of tbe state of Montana.

It affirmatively appears from tbe record that, at tbe time tbe deposits were made, there was no agreement or understanding between plaintiff and tbe bank that tbe deposits should constitute special deposits.

1. Deposits of funds for a specified time, and for which certificates of' deposit are issued, constitute general deposits, and, “tbe bank becoming insolvent, tbe depositor must be remitted to tbe position of a general creditor.” (2 Micbie on Banks & Banking, sec. 152.)

2. Counsel for plaintiff contends that, as tbe funds de posited by plaintiff were trust funds in bis bands, their deposit in a bank having notice of this fact constituted a special deposit, and whether tbe deposit was rightfully or *186 wrongfully made, the funds may be followed into the hands of the defendant receiver. As pointed out in the Pethybridge Case above, this contention is untenable, and, on the authority of that case, the judgment herein must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Affirmed.

Mb. Chief Justice Callaway and Associate Justices Hol. loway, Galen and Stark concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 P. 573, 75 Mont. 184, 1926 Mont. LEXIS 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lashorn-v-first-state-bank-mont-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack