Richmond County v. Page Trust Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtCoNNOR, J.
In Trust Co. v. Rose, 192 N. C., 673, we held that the assignment of the notes described in the complaint in this action, made by the Bank of Hamlet to T. M. Rose, was valid, and that as between the receivers of the Bank of Hamlet, which had become insolvent, subsequent to the date of said assignment, and the said T. M. Rose, the latter was the owner of said notes, by reason of the assignment. This assignment was made to indemnify the said Rose and others from loss on the bond executed by the Bank of Hamlet, as principal, and the said Rose and others, as sureties, to the plaintiff in this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Page Trust Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
3Cited by9 opinions
- Schumacher v. Eastern Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1931
- Sneeden v. City of Marion, Ill.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1933
- Pottorff v. El Paso-Hudspeth Counties Road Dist.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1933
- In Re WallaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Sneeden v. City of MarionDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1932
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.