Minard v. Watts
| Decision Date | 29 January 1910 |
| Docket Number | 588,Equity. |
| Citation | 186 F. 245 |
| Parties | MINARD et al. v. WATTS. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Kansas |
W. P Dillard and W. W. Padgett, for complainants.
F. F Oldham and Keene & Gates, for defendant.
By the bill filed and presented in this case, complainants seek to recover from defendant the sum of $450, on the theory this sum constitutes a trust fund in the possession of the defendant as receiver of the First National Bank of Ft Scott, this state (hereinafter called the 'Bank'), to which complainants, in equity, have a right superior to the general creditors of the Bank. The case has been submitted for final decree on agreed facts and briefs of solicitors for the respective parties. The facts are:
Complainants being involved in litigation pending in the courts of the state between themselves, arising over the question of title and ownership of a quarter section of land, the possession of which was held by one Fowler as tenant, agreed the money representing the landlord's share of the rentals arising from the land during the pendency of the litigation should be deposited in the Bank, to abide the final decision of the controversy over the title to the land, then received by the successful party. In pursuance of the Bank, to abide the February 12, 1907, Fowler deposited with the Bank the sum of $180; September 9, 1907, the sum of $90; December 31, 1907, the sum of $90; and September 30, 1908, the sum of $90. These sums so deposited make up the fund in dispute in this controversy.
The question presented for decision is: Have complainants such a superior right to the funds in dispute as in equity will enable them to follow and recover the entire amount so deposited from defendant, receiver of the estate of the insolvent Bank, in liquidation in his hands, or will they be required to prorate with the general creditors of the Bank? This question must depend for its decision on the legal relation of complainants to the Bank. From the facts it is clear Fowler, the tenant, was by agreement of complainants constituted their joint agent to deposit the landlord's share of rental money arising from the land in controversy in the Bank, to be by it retained until it should be determined which of complainants should succeed in the litigation arising over the land from which the funds deposited arose, and then pay over the amount of the deposits made to the successful party.
While out of the great variety of transactions that may be had between a banking institution and those dealing with it there may arise many different relations, depending for their legal effect on the precise facts which characterize the particular transaction, yet in this case the facts leave no room for doubt, and the parties have stipulated the transaction between complainants and the Bank was one of deposit, in the following language:
'It is agreed by the parties hereto that there was not, at any time, any expressed agreement or understanding between Henry Minard, or the Garrett Biblical Institute, or either of them, on the one part, and the First National Bank of Ft. Scott, Kan., on the other part, that the deposits, or any of them, referred to in the bill of complaint in this case, were to be held or kept separate and distinct from the general funds of the Bank.'
Therefore, the transaction here involved being one of deposit, the legal status of the parties thus created must be either that of bailor and bailee, or of creditor and debtor; for no other legal relation can arise out of the act of one depositing money with a bank.
The question, therefore, is: Was the deposit in this case general or special? If general, complainants parted with their title to the funds deposited, the relation of debtor and creditor was by the act of deposit created between complainants and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
John L. Walker Co. v. Alden
...with a trust. We are sustained in this view by decisions in other federal circuits upon similar or analogous facts." In Minard v. Watts (C. C.) 186 F. 245, 247, the parties had agreed that certain rentals due a landlord should be deposited in the bank pending the disposition of certain liti......
-
In re Battani, 15
...and is in harmony with a great majority of the decisions on the point involved here. In re Bologh (D. C.) 185 F. 825; Minard et al. v. Watts (C. C.) 186 F. 245; In re Potell (D. C.) 53 F. (2d) 877. In Florida Bank & Trust Co. v. Union Indemnity Co. (C. C. A.) 55 F.(2d) 640, 641, 83 A. L. R.......
-
Martin v. Meyerheim
... ... claims or rights over other creditors, but must share like ... other creditors.' Minard v. Watts (C. C.) 186 F ... 245; Clisby v. Mastin, 150 Ala. 132, 43 So. 742, 124 ... Am. St. Rep. 64; Fletcher v. Sharpe, 108 Ind. 276, 9 ... N.E ... ...
-
Keyes v. Paducah & IR Co.
...impressed with a trust. We are sustained in this view by decisions in other federal circuits upon similar or analogous facts. Minard v. Watts, 186 F. 245 (C. C. Kan.); Northern Sugar Corp. v. Thompson, supra; Fallgatter v. Citizens' National Bank, 11 F. (2d) 383 (D. C. Minn.); Pitts v. Peas......