State ex rel. Davis v. Farmers State Bank
| Decision Date | 16 April 1925 |
| Docket Number | 23300 |
| Parties | STATE, EX REL. CLARENCE A. DAVIS, ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPELLEE, v. FARMERS STATE BANK, APPELLEE. UNITED STATES NATIONAL BANK, CLAIMANT, APPELLANT, v. LAWRENCE A. FRICKE, RECEIVER, APPELLEE |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the district court for Morrill county: RALPH W. HOBART JUDGE. Affirmed in part, and reversed in part.
AFFIRMED IN PART, AND REVERSED IN PART.
Mothersead & York and Morsman, Maxwell & Haggart, for appellant.
Williams Hurd & Neighbors and C. M. Skiles, contra.
Heard before MORRISSEY, C. J., ROSE, GOOD and EVANS, JJ., REDICK and SHEPHERD, District Judges.
This is a controversy between the receiver of the Farmers State Bank of Bayard, an insolvent corporation, and the United States National Bank of Omaha, claimant, over the payment of four certificates of deposit out of the bank guaranty fund. In a proceeding by the state for the appointment of a receiver, claimant filed a petition for the allowance of claims based on certificates of deposit issued by insolvent as follows: To A. A. Ericson July 13, 1921, due January 13, 1922, $ 2,000; to A. A. Ericson October 15, 1921, due April 15, 1922, $ 6,000; to J. A. Cavett September 22, 1921, due November 20, 1921, $ 5,000; to T. E. Williams September 22, 1921, due November 20, 1921, $ 5,000; each bearing interest at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum. Claimant pleaded that these certificates of deposit were assigned to it in due course of business, that they are unpaid, and that they are protected by the bank guaranty fund. The receiver in an answer to the petition of claimant resisted the allowance of the claims as charges against the bank guaranty fund on the grounds that the certificates of deposit evidenced loans to the bank instead of deposits therein, that the payees were stockholders whose claims were not within the protection of the bank guaranty fund, and that claimant acquired by assignment no greater right. The statute on which the receiver relies contains this provision:
"No claim to priority shall be allowed which is based upon any evidence of indebtedness in the hands of or originally issued to any stockholder, officer or employee of such bank, which represents money obtained by such stockholder, officer or employee, from himself or some other person, firm, corporation or bank in lieu of or for the purpose of effecting a loan of funds to such a failed bank." Comp. St. 1922, sec. 8033.
Upon a trial of the issues the district court allowed the certificates of deposit as general claims aggregating $ 19,093.98, including interest, against the assets of insolvent, but denied recourse to the bank guaranty fund. Claimant has appealed.
Did the certificates of deposit issued by insolvent to Ericson evidence valid claims against the bank guaranty fund? He was a stockholder from the time the bank was organized until it was closed, a period of several years. He was also a depositor of his own money subject to check. When the solvency of the bank was not in question he exchanged a 2,000-dollar check against his own account for a time certificate of deposit in the same amount. The 2,000-dollar certificate of deposit in controversy is the last of a series of renewals having their origin in the earlier deposits. It evidences an honest deposit of Ericson's money, left with the bank in good faith and accepted without fraud or collusion. As a...
To continue reading
Request your trial