Leach v. State Sav. Bank of Logan

Decision Date21 June 1926
Docket NumberNo. 37222.,37222.
Citation202 Iowa 97,209 N.W. 421
PartiesLEACH, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF BANKING, v. STATE SAV. BANK OF LOGAN ET AL.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; Earl Peters, Judge.

This case involves a question of preference in favor of certain claimants in a bank receivership proceedings. The district court allowed the preference and the receiver has appealed. Reversed.

See, also, 209 N. W. 422.Ben J. Gibson, Atty. Gen., and P. E. Roadifer, of Logan, for appellants.

Bolter & Murray and Robertson & Havens, all of Logan, for appellees.

EVANS, J.

[1] The appellant is the superintendent of banking of the state of Iowa, and as such has became the receiver of the State Savings Bank of Logan, insolvent. The appellee, Harrison county, has a deposit in the insolvent bank to a large amount. It made application to the receiver that its claim be established as a preferred claim under the provisions of section 3825a, Code Supplement 1913. Five other municipal corporations, who also had deposits in the insolvent bank, made like applications respectively, each claiming a right of preference under the provisions of the above-noted statute. The receiver denied the claims for preference, but classified each claim as a general deposit. He made report accordingly to the district court, and asked that his report be reviewed and approved. The claimants appeared in the district court and resisted the approval of the report and there pressed their claims for preference. The district court allowed the preference to each claimant. It was from such order that the receiver appealed.

[2] The insolvent bank went into the hands of the receiver in May, 1923. The receivership proceeding and the method of disbursement thereunder are governed by the statute then in force. This was chapter 189 of the Laws of the 40th G. A. amending section 1877 of the Code. This statute was construed by us in Leach v. Exchange State Bank (Iowa) 203 N. W. 31. This case is decisive of the controlling question presented herein. The case at bar was decided below before publication of our opinion in Leach v. Exchange State Bank. The decision below was undoubtedly influenced by our holding in Re Marathon Savings Bank, 198 Iowa, 692, 196 N. W. 729, 200 N. W. 199. In that case we declared the state of law as it was at the time that receivership was instituted, and held that the method of disbursement of the assets of the insolvent was controlled by section 3825a, Code Supplement of 1913. Our holding in Re Marathon Savings Bank would have controlled the decision in the instant case, if there had been no intervening change in the statute prior to the receivership proceeding herein. The principal contention for the appellee is that the appellant has no right to raise any question here on appeal which he did not raise at the trial in the district court. The contention is that the receiver did not make the point in the district court that the question at issue was controlled by the later statute. It is urged, therefore, that he waived the point. It is urged also that a certain stipulation by the parties in the district court amounted to such a waiver. Such stipulation contained the following:

“It is further agreed that the matter of the allowance of said claims, and the issue to be determined by the court is whether or not said claims should be given preference over the claims of depositors and other creditors under and by virtue of section 3825a of the 1913 Supplement to the Code, and that such issue is properly raised by the pleading in each case.”

Reliance is also had upon the following prayer of the receiver as a part of his report:

“That a day of hearing be fixed upon each of the foregoing claims and the claims be consolidated and submitted together upon the question of preference under ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Shayne of Miami, Inc. v. Greybow, Inc.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • December 16, 1957
    ...law, in a proceeding in court, adversely to the interests of his trust.' 75 C.J.S. Receivers § 167, page 806. In Leach v. State Savings Bank of Logan, 202 Iowa 265, 209 N.W. 421, it was held that the failure of a receiver of an insolvlent bank to assert non-applicability of a statute at tri......
  • Bates v. Farmers Loan & Trust Co. of Iowa City
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1940
    ... ... Banking of the State of Iowa, as receiver. By proper order of ... court, B. S ... examiner in charge of said bank is the existence of assets ... belonging to said ... Cutchall, 209 Iowa 193, 225 N.W. 865; ... Farmers' Sav. Bk. v. Pomeroy, 211 Iowa 337, 233 ... N.W. 488; Andrew v. Union B. & T. Co., 225 Iowa 929, ... 282 N.W. 299; Leach v. Farmers & Merchants Sav. Bk., ... 207 Iowa 471, 220 ... ...
  • Schubert v. Andrew
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • February 14, 1928
    ...insufferable. Turning to the brief and argument of the plaintiffs, much stress is laid on the case of Leach, Receiver, v. State Savings Bank of Logan, 202 Iowa, 97, 209 N. W. 421. In that case it was stipulated in the lower court that the rights of the county were to be determined under a c......
  • Gillett v. American Sav. Bank of Maquoketa
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • January 8, 1935
    ... ... institution organized under the laws of the state of Iowa. It ... went into the hands of a receiver on the 3d day of October, ... 1931, and L. A ... Andrew v. Peoples Sav. Bank ... of Nevada, 207 Iowa, 948, 222 N.W. 8; Leach v. State ... Sav. Bank, 202 Iowa, 97, 209 N.W. 421." In ... determining the real character of a ... ...
  • 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