Branciforti v. Ninety-Eighth, Realty Co.
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
1Opinion of the CourtCorlett, J.
The only question involved in this case is whether money *398deposited in a bank in “escrow” is a fund of such character as to give it preference over general creditors after the assets of the bank have been taken possession of by the superintendent of banks for the purpose of liquidation under the law of this state. The question is raised by a demurrer filed by the plaintiffs to the answer of Ira J. Fulton, Superintendent of Banks of the state of Ohio, in charge of the liquidation of the Union Trust Company of Cleveland, Ohio. The undisputed facts are as follows:
On or about the 21st day of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Marine Bank v. Fulton BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Woodhouse v. CrandallIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
- Capital National Bank v. Coldwater National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Shopert v. Indiana National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1908
- McDonald, Admr. v. FultonOhio Supreme Court · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.