Weeks v. . Hood, Commissioner of Banks

183 S.E. 288, 209 N.C. 281, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 453

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

That the relation of creditor and debtor existed between the plaintiff and the North Carolina Bank and Trust Company at the time of the latter’s closing is clearly established by what was said in Arnold v. Trust Co., 195 N. C., 345, 142 S. E., 217. See, also, Bank v. Bank, 197 N. C., 526, 150 S. E., 34.

The case of Textile Corp. v. Hood, Comr., 206 N. C., 782, 175 S. E., 151, cited and relied upon by plaintiff, is distinguishable by reason of different fact situations.

The judgment denying priority of plaintiff’s claim is correct.

Affirmed.

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