Legal Opinion

Rosenstein v. Mechanics & Farmers Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 1, 1981No. 45PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

HUSKINS, Justice.

The dispositive question posed by this appeal is whether the savings accounts were validly assigned to plaintiffs.

Bank deposits are assignable. Lipe v. Bank, 236 N.C. 328, 72 S.E. 2d 759 (1952). When an individual deposits money in a bank account, a debtor-creditor relationship is established between the bank and the depositor. “The debt thus created is subject to the rule that ordinary business contracts for money due or to become due are assignable.” Id. at 331, 72 S.E. 2d at 761.

Defendant contends that this principle of assignability is subject to contrary agreement by the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Knutton v. CofieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Weyerhaeuser Company v. Carolina Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  3. Lipe v. Guilford National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. McCabe v. Union Dime Savings BankCity of New York Municipal Court · 1934

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rosenstein v. Mechanics & Farmers BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API