Missouri Utilities Co. v. Scott County Bank

• Citation: 62 S.W.2d 933
• Decision Date: 19 August 1933
• Docket Number: 5239
• Parties: MISSOURI UTILITIES CO. v. SCOTT COUNTY BANK et al.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

62 S.W.2d 933

MISSOURI UTILITIES CO. v. SCOTT COUNTY BANK et al.

No. 5239

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Springfield

August 19, 1933

Appeal from Circuit Court, Scott County; Frank Kelly, Judge.

“ Not to be published in State Reports.”

In the matter of the liquidation of the Scott County Bank, in which the Missouri Utilities Company filed a claim against D. R Harrison, Commissioner of Finance of the State of Missouri. Judgment for claimant, and respondent appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

Bailey & Bailey, of Sikeston, for appellant.

I. R Kelso, of Cape Girardeau, and R. D. Abbott, of St. Louis, for respondent.

OPINION

BAILEY, Judge.

This is a claim for preference filed by plaintiff against the Scott County Bank, which closed its doors on the 5th day of December, 1931, and was taken in charge by the commissioner of finance. The claim is based upon the following state of facts: Plaintiff company had for many years been in the business of furnishing electric current in the village of Morley. From the year 1915 to the date the defendant bank failed it acted as the collecting agent of plaintiff in collecting bills for electric service supplied to the inhabitants of said village for which services said bank received a commission of 5 per cent. paid monthly by check. Defendant made monthly reports of the collections. As the collections were made they were deposited to the credit of plaintiff in defendant bank on the 5th, 10th, 15th, and 25th of each month. Plaintiff was accustomed to draw on defendant bank for even sums of money against the deposit, but did not always do so each month, and at times permitted the account to "build up." Plaintiff never used defendant bank as a banking institution for paying bills. At the time the bank failed plaintiff had on deposit the sum of $99, for which preference was allowed by the circuit court. Defendant has appealed.

This case involves the identical question presented in the case of Greene County Building & Loan Association v. S. L Cantley, Commissioner, 62 S.W.2d 931, decided by this court at the present term, but not yet reported [in State report]. We held in that case that, where a bank, which had acted as collecting agent of the dues paid by stockholders of the building and loan association, deposited the moneys so collected to the credit of said building and loan association under an arrangement whereby the association would draw out the full amount of said collections...