Palmer v. Hood Ex Rel. Page Trust Co.

175 S.E. 81, 206 N.C. 804, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 313
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 20, 1934
StatusPublished

This text of 175 S.E. 81 (Palmer v. Hood Ex Rel. Page Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Palmer v. Hood Ex Rel. Page Trust Co., 175 S.E. 81, 206 N.C. 804, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 313 (N.C. 1934).

Opinion

Pee OuRiAM.

Is a general depositor of funds in a bank, hopelessly insolvent at the time of making such deposits, entitled to a preference in the liquidation of said bank?

Preferences are usually created by statute or arise from the application of the trust fund theory. In re Bank, 204 N. C., 143, 167 S. E., 561. While there is abundant authority for the position asserted by the plaintiffs, this Court has consistently held that a general deposit such as disclosed by the present record, does not create a preference. Although there may be slight variations of fact, the case of Mfg. Co. v. Hood, 204 N. C., 349, 168 S. E., 523, and Mfg. Co. v. Hood, ante, 324, are determinative in principle.

Affirmed.

Schenck, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Related

Beacon Manufacturing Co. v. Hood
168 S.E. 523 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
In Re Bank
167 S.E. 561 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
175 S.E. 81, 206 N.C. 804, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-hood-ex-rel-page-trust-co-nc-1934.