Legal Opinion

Weeks v. . Hood, Commissioner of Banks

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 22, 1936Published

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

That the relation of creditor and debtor existed between the plaintiff and the North Carolina Bank and Trust Company at the time of the latter’s closing is clearly established by what was said in Arnold v. Trust Co., 195 N. C., 345, 142 S. E., 217. See, also, Bank v. Bank, 197 N. C., 526, 150 S. E., 34.

The case of Textile Corp. v. Hood, Comr., 206 N. C., 782, 175 S. E., 151, cited and relied upon by plaintiff, is distinguishable by reason of different fact situations.

The judgment denying priority of plaintiff’s claim is correct.

Affirmed.

Devin, J., took no part in the consideration or decision…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Virginia-Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank v. First & Citizens National Bank of Elizabeth CitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  2. Textile Corp. v. . Hood, Comr. of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Arnold v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API