Legal Opinion

County of Traverse v. Veigel

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 15, 1929No. 27,161PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.

Defendant in charge of the Farmers State Bank of Tintah for liquidation appeals from a judgment determining that a certain amount of plaintiff’s funds in the bank were trust funds entitled to preference.,

The bank while a going concern was a duly designated county depository, having given a bond for $6,000, which authorized the county treasurer, under G-. S. 1923, § 848, to deposit county funds therein up to $3,000. On November 9, 1926, there was to the credit of plaintiff in its deposit account a sum less than $3,000. But it appears that previous thereto the bank had received $4,752.60 more…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Yellowstone County v. First Trust & Savings BankMontana Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Brown v. Sheldon State BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
  3. Page County v. RoseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  4. Fidelity State Bank v. North Fork Highway DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Powell v. Board of SupervisorsMississippi Supreme Court · 1914

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bauck v. First State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  2. County of Traverse v. VeigelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  3. Anderson v. Peterson State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API