Legal Opinion

Wells v. Cole

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 12, 1935No. 30,225PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Devaney, Chief Justice.

This action involves the sole question of whether the contents of a safety deposit box are subject to garnishment. The situation here is that which usually prevails in the case of banks and other concerns which own safety deposit boxes and rent or hire them out to depositors. The usual safety deposit box is controlled by a double lock which can be opened only by the simultaneous use of two different keys, one a guard or master key retained by the bank, the other a key delivered to the depositor at the time that he rents the box. The bank cannot gain entrance to the box…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Carples v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1925
  2. People v. Mercantile Safe Deposit Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  3. Dupont v. MooreSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. O'MALLEY v. Putnam Safe Deposit Vaults, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
  2. Kohlsaat v. First National Bank of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API