Palmer v. Hood Ex Rel. Page Trust Co.

175 S.E. 81, 206 N.C. 804, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 313
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 20, 1934·Published

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

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

175 S.E. 81 (Palmer v. Hood Ex Rel. Page Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)