Spartanburg County v. Arthur

169 S.E. 235, 169 S.C. 456, 1933 S.C. LEXIS 122
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedMay 2, 1933
Docket13630
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 169 S.E. 235 (Spartanburg County v. Arthur) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spartanburg County v. Arthur, 169 S.E. 235, 169 S.C. 456, 1933 S.C. LEXIS 122 (S.C. 1933).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice! Bonham.

The history of this litigation, and the cáuses which led to it, are clearly and succinctly stated in the order of Judge Sease, from which this appeal comes to this Court. That order correctly disposes of the issues made by the appeal.

It is not seriously denied that the transactions between E. G. Miller and the Bank of 'Union created a trust in favor of the County of Spartanburg in the assets of the bank. The gist of the contention is that they did not create a trust ex maleficio which entitles the county to a preference in the distribution of those assets.

The evidence in this case is conclusive that the Bank of Union had knowledge that the funds which it received from E. G. Miller were funds of the County of Spartanburg, which Miller had in trust as the treasurer of the county, and that they were being misappropriated by him to the payment of the obligations of the Bank of Duncan, of which he was president, to the Bank of Union. When, therefore, the Bank of Union received them with this knowledge and converted them to its uses, there arose a trust ex maleficio; there were present the characteristic elements of fraud by him who misappropriated the funds, and knowledge thereof by the bank which received them in payment of obligations not due it by the lawful owner of the funds.

*462 The exceptions are overruled, and the order of Judge Sease is affirmed. Let it be reported.

Mr. CitiEE Justice BeEase and Messrs. Justices Stabler and Carter concur.

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

Related

Insurance Co. of North America v. Dimaio
170 S.E.2d 258 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Want v. ALFRED M. BEST CO., INC.
105 S.E.2d 678 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1958)
Spartanburg County v. Arthur
185 S.E. 486 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 S.E. 235, 169 S.C. 456, 1933 S.C. LEXIS 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spartanburg-county-v-arthur-sc-1933.