Bridge v. First Nat. Bank-Detroit
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
KNIGHT, District Jndge.
The plaintiffs are receivers appointed in equity suits. Acting as such they made certain deposits in the above-named banks. Some. of such deposits were carried on the hooks of the bank as savings deposits, some commercial deposits subject to cheek, and some deposits evidenced by certificates of deposits issued by the bank. Some accounts bore interest. Each of the defendant banks is insolvent and in charge of a receiver appointed by the Comptroller.
These suits have been brought to have such deposits declared to he trust funds or special deposits and as such entitled to…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Davis v. Elmira Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Commercial Bank of Pa. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- In re Interborough Consol. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
- Woodhouse v. CrandallIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
- Keyes v. Paducah & IR Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Albright v. McDermottCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1935
- Eckhout v. Guardian National Bank of CommerceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1934
- In Re BattaniDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1934
- Erie R. v. MizellDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1934
- Jessica Marino, et al. v. Comerica Bank, et al.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.