Legal Opinion

Sherwood v. Central Michigan Savings Bank

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1895PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Motion by the receiver of the defendant bank for leave to apply to the circuit court for Ingham county, in chancery, for a rehearing.- The facts are stated in the opinion, and in 103 Mich. 109.

1Per curiam

By an opinion filed at the October term *66(103 Mich. 109) it was decreed that the receiver of the defendant bank pay to one Johnson the sum of $5,000, held in trust by said bank and receiver. An application is now made for leave to apply to the circuit court in chancery for a rehearing, upon the ground that the receiver is able to show that such trust fund was partially, if not wholly, expended by said bank before the appointment of the receiver.

As a perusal-of the former opinion will show, the petitioner (Johnson) showed that the sum of $5,000 was received by the bank upon a mortgage placed in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Sherwood v. Central Michigan Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Detroit Savings Bank v. TruesdailMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pomeroy v. NoudMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Brown v. NapperMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Frohlich v. AikmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Roelofs v. WeverMichigan Supreme Court · 1899

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

Powered by the Exa API