Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hoffman v. Unger

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1943No. 9433Published

1ConcurrenceRose, Judge

The plaintiff, in his bill of complaint clearly and unequivocally alleges that “all of said depositors have been paid the principal of their respective deposits in full but have been paid no interest thereon.” (Italics supplied.) No pleading or evidence in the case in any degree contradicts this statement. The court clearly accepted and acted upon it, since the final decree provides that the receiver “do pay said sum of $3,639.18, or a dividend of 2.2% interest to the depositors on claims proven in said bank”. (Italics supplied.) It is, therefore, absolutely clear that the principals of all…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Stewart v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Union Trust Co. v. KaplanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
  3. Alabama City, G. & A. Ry. Co. v. City of GadsdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
  4. Bennett v. Federal Coal & Coke Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Brady v. The Mayor of the City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897

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

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

Powered by the Exa API