Ex Parte Wachovia Bank & Trust Co v. People's Bank Of Darlington, No. 13070.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtCOTHRAN, J
Decision Date06 April 1931
PartiesEx parte WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST CO. NETTLES et al. v. PEOPLE'S BANK OF DARLINGTON et al.
Docket NumberNo. 13070.

158 S.E. 214

Ex parte WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST CO.
NETTLES et al.
v.
PEOPLE'S BANK OF DARLINGTON et al.

No. 13070.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

April 6, 1931.


Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Darlington County; E. C. Dennis, Judge.

Suit by J. L. Nettles and others against the People's Bank of Darlington, in which G. B. Brasington was appointed receiver for defendant, and the Wachovia Bank & Trust Company intervened. From a decree confirming a master's report disallowing intervener's claim to preference, intervener appeals.

Affirmed.

Mitchell & Horlbeck, of Charleston, and Whitlock, Dockery & Shaw, of Charlotte, N. C, for appellant.

Samuel Want, of Darlington, for respondent.

COTHRAN, J.

Upon further consideration of this matter, in connection with the opinion filed February 17, 1931, it is ordered that said opinion be withdrawn and the following substituted in lieu thereof:

An opinion was filed in this case on August 27, 1930, affirming the decree of the circuit judge. Thereafter, upon a petition for a rehearing filed by the appellant, an order was passed granting the petition and setting the case down for oral argument at the October term, the order also providing that counsel representing any other interests which may be affected by the decision be allowed to participate in the argument orally or by briefs. The rehearing was had at the October term, at which, in addition to oral arguments and the original briefs of counsel, a brief was filed by a number of attorneys representing interests which would be affected by the decision.

Thereafter, on February 17th, an opinion was filed in which the points under discussion were limited to foreign banks. In view

[158 S.E. 215]

of the fact that counsel representing domestic banks as well as those representing foreign banks fully argued all questions involving the constitutionality of the act as applied to domestic as well as foreign banks, all questions affecting the constitutionality of the act hereinafter quoted have by consent been fully discussed, and are herein considered and decided.

The petitioner, a forwarding bank, claims priority in the distribution of the assets of a bank in the hands of a receiver, under the following circumstances:

A few days before October 27, 1928, certain customers of the Wachovia Bank & Trust Company of Winston-Salem, N. C. deposited with it for collection a number of items aggregating $507.60: they consisted of checks drawn by depositors of the People's Bank of Darlington, upon the bank, and were mailed by the Wachovia Bank directly to the People's Bank for collection and remittance. The People's Bank charged the amounts of the checks to the respective depositors, and remitted to the Wachovia Bank a cashier's check for $507.60, drawn upon the National Park Bank of New York. At that time the People's Bank had on deposit in the New York bank more than enough to pay the cashier's check. On October 20. 1028, the People's Bank closed its doors, which information was received by the New York bank before the presentation of the cashier's check; they accordingly refused payment of the check. The Wachovia Bank filed Its claim with the receiver of the People's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • In re Riverton State Bank, 1860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • October 1, 1935
    ...to distinguish the previous holding of the same court with regard to the title of another act, in Nettles v. People's Bank, 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214, cannot be, to our minds, distinguished. Furthermore, in the Witt Case, supra, the court said: 'The preferred claim, in the event of insolve......
  • Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco v. Citizens Bank & Trust Company, of Pocatello, 6008
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • June 28, 1933
    ...to distinguish the previous holding of the same court with regard to the title of another act, in Nettles v. People's Bank, 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214, cannot be, to our minds, distinguished. Furthermore, in the Witt case, supra, the court said: "The preferred claim, in the event of insolve......
  • In re Riverton State Bank, 1860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 11, 1934
    ...partnership and individuals sending their drafts directly to a bank for collection." Ex parte Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214. The act was amended in 1930, and the discriminatory provisions were eliminated. That act was upheld. Witt v. Bank, 166 S.C. 1, 164 S.E. 306. I......
  • Ex Parte Sanders., No. 13512.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • November 16, 1932
    ...the decision of this court in the case of Ex Parte Wachovia Bank & Trust Company (Nettles v. People's Bank of Darlington) 160 S. C. 104, 158 S. E. 214, which decision declared the[167 S.E. 155] Act April 26, 1927 (35 St. at Large, p. 369), relating to the liability of banks doing business i......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • In re Riverton State Bank, 1860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • October 1, 1935
    ...to distinguish the previous holding of the same court with regard to the title of another act, in Nettles v. People's Bank, 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214, cannot be, to our minds, distinguished. Furthermore, in the Witt Case, supra, the court said: 'The preferred claim, in the event of insolve......
  • Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco v. Citizens Bank & Trust Company, of Pocatello, 6008
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • June 28, 1933
    ...to distinguish the previous holding of the same court with regard to the title of another act, in Nettles v. People's Bank, 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214, cannot be, to our minds, distinguished. Furthermore, in the Witt case, supra, the court said: "The preferred claim, in the event of insolve......
  • In re Riverton State Bank, 1860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 11, 1934
    ...partnership and individuals sending their drafts directly to a bank for collection." Ex parte Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., 160 S.C. 104, 158 S.E. 214. The act was amended in 1930, and the discriminatory provisions were eliminated. That act was upheld. Witt v. Bank, 166 S.C. 1, 164 S.E. 306. I......
  • Ex Parte Sanders., No. 13512.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • November 16, 1932
    ...the decision of this court in the case of Ex Parte Wachovia Bank & Trust Company (Nettles v. People's Bank of Darlington) 160 S. C. 104, 158 S. E. 214, which decision declared the[167 S.E. 155] Act April 26, 1927 (35 St. at Large, p. 369), relating to the liability of banks doing business i......
  • 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