Divine v. Unaka Nat. Bank

Decision Date22 November 1911
Citation140 S.W. 747
PartiesDIVINE v. UNAKA NAT. BANK.
CourtTennessee Supreme Court

Action by Paul E. Divine, administrator of Thomas Brown, deceased, against the Unaka National Bank. There was a decree of the Court of Civil Appeals, reversing a decree of the chancellor dismissing the bill on sustaining a demurrer thereto, and defendant brings certiorari. Demurrer to bill overruled, and cause remanded to chancery court, with directions.

Divine & Moore, for complainant. S. C. Williams, for defendant.

NEIL, J.

The bill contains the following allegations:

"That Thomas Brown died intestate in Washington county, Tennessee, on the 12th day of November, 1908, within the limits of the reservation of the Mountain Branch of the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers, and as a member thereof; that the complainant was duly appointed as his administrator by the county court of Washington county, on November 30, 1909, and qualified and gave bond as such. Letters of administration issued in pursuance thereof, and the original or duly certified copies thereof will be filed on or before the hearing, if required.

"The complainant would further show that his intestate was a soldier of fortune, a wanderer over the face of the earth, without family or home. He was born in India, came to America in time to participate as a soldier of the United States in the War between the States from 1861 to 1865, and later drifted southward to some of the Spanish-speaking countries, where he remained for some time. Later said intestate returned to the United States, and after wandering from place to place, without any fixed place of residence, habitation, home, or domicile, and without any purpose or intention on his part so to do, or to permanently establish himself theretofore, he came to the said Mountain Branch of the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers, in Washington county, Tennessee, and became a member thereof, by reason of his military service as aforesaid, where he died.

"Complainant would further show that his intestate at the time of his death left two small open accounts or deposits in some of the local banks here in Johnson City, Tennessee, which have been paid over to and received by him in virtue of his said appointment as administrator, and that in addition his said intestate had the following estate, rights, and credits at the time of his death, to wit:

"(1) A deposit in the defendant, the Unaka National Bank, here in Johnson City, Tennessee, in the sum of $312, made by said intestate voluntarily and of his own volition and motion after he became a member of said Mountain Branch, and which said deposit is represented by a certificate issued to said intestate by the defendant therefor, No. 9,630.

"(2) Another deposit made in like manner and under like conditions and circumstances with the defendant for $25; the certificate representing same being No. 9,640.

"Complainant would show that these said certificates of deposit were in the possession of said intestate at the time of his death, the property of said intestate, unindorsed, untransferred, and undisposed of in any way, and in no wise hypothecated. Complainant would show that said intestate died within said Mountain Branch reservation limits, and the authorities thereof in the discharge of their duties gathered up the same as bailees, trustees, and agents of and for those rightfully entitled thereto, and your complainant has been unable to secure the same, or obtain the possession thereof, as he verily believes he is entitled to do. Complainant charges that said authorities have no title or ownership, claim, or beneficial interest in said certificates, no property rights in the same, and no right, power, or authority to sell, transfer, convey, indorse, collect, or make any assignment thereof in law, equity, or in fact. And complainant further charges on information and belief that no such attempt has been made.

"Complainant would further show that said authorities also hold another item or asset, gathered up in the same way, the property of said intestate; that is, an original and duplicate check, issued to said intestate by the defendant Unaka Bank, on Lloyd's Bank, Limited, of London, England, for about 1 pound and 7 pence, which was unassigned, and which was the property of the decedent at the time of his death, and which now constitutes an asset of his said estate, due, owing, and collectible from said defendant bank.

"Complainant would further show that as administrator of the estate of the said Thomas Brown, under and by virtue of the appointment and letters of administration aforesaid, he has requested of said authorities of the said Mountain Branch the possession and delivery of said certificates and assets as above mentioned and shown, but that said authorities, for one captious reason or another, among them the asserted contention that said authorities were not in the reach or subject to process of the courts of Tennessee, or were exempt therefrom in this behalf, though without any claim of interest, right, or title or benefit therein, have failed, neglected, and refused to make the delivery demanded, or to turn over the same to your complainant as such administrator on demand. Complainant would further show that as such administrator he has made the said Unaka National Bank acquainted with the said failure on the part of the said home authorities, and said bank has failed and refused to pay over the amount of said certificates on demand without a surrender of said certificates concurrently, which condition your complainant has been unable to comply with for the reasons above shown.

"Your complainant would further show that said amounts hereinbefore set forth and shown are bona fide assets of the estate of his intestate, and that he is advised that he has a right to come into your honor's court and compel the defendant by proper order and decree to pay over the same, with full interest and the costs of the cause. Said amounts are due, owing, and unpaid, and said defendant bank is responsible and liable therefor to your complainant. Said home authorities in law have no claim of right, title, or beneficial interest in the said certificates and checks, could not lawfully make such claim, and do not so attempt to do. Said home or its authorities are without power to collect, sell, transfer, or assign the same, and there is no law or authority whereby they can be constituted or nominated as administrator as against your complainant, or exercise in the least or in any wise any probate jurisdiction whatever. Complainant further charges that no other jurisdiction or forum than the county court of Washington county, Tennessee, can appoint an administrator, and your complainant can lawfully receive said amounts from the said defendant, or compel it to pay over or turn over the same."

The bank demurred on several grounds, the substance of which is that it was entitled to have the certificates surrendered before payment, and that the bill did not allege that any demand had been made, accompanied by such offer of surrender of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Adams v. Londeree
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 27 Julio 1954
    ...Telegraph Co. v. Chiles, 214 U.S. 274, 29 S.Ct. 613, 53 L.Ed. 994; Renner v. Bennett, 21 Ohio St. 431; Divine v. Unaka National Bank, 125 Tenn. 98, 140 S.W. 747, 39 L.R.A.,N.S., 586; In re Kernan, 247 App.Div. 664, 288 N.Y.S. 329; Harrison v. Laveen, 67 Ariz. 337, 196 P.2d 456; Barrett v. P......
  • Mosby v. Colson, No. W2006-00490-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. App. 8/14/2006), W2006-00490-COA-R3-CV.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • 14 Agosto 2006
    ...courts. Tafflin v. Levitt, 493 U.S. 455, 458-59 (1990); Watson v. Barnett, 789 S.W.2d 538, 542 (Tenn. 1989); Divine v. Unaka Nat'l Bank, 140 S.W. 747, 749-50 (Tenn. 1911). We previously have recognized that, pursuant to this principle, our courts have concurrent jurisdiction over § 1983 act......
  • Watson v. Cleveland Chair Co.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 4 Diciembre 1989
    ...interests. See Gulf Offshore Company v. Mobil Oil Corp., 453 U.S. 473, 101 S.Ct. 2870, 2875, 69 L.Ed.2d 784 (1981); Devine v. Bank, 125 Tenn. 98, 108, 140 S.W. 747 (1911). The supremacy clause of Art. VI of the Constitution provides Congress with the power to preempt state law. Preemption o......
  • Nash v. Mulle
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 19 Enero 1993
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT