Legal Opinion
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Montgomery
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided January 26, 1933No. 7 Div. 150PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, Justice.
The question of subrogation and preference as to funds in a state bank in the process of liquidation is presented by this bill.in equity.
It is averred that R. F. Grizzle was theretofore duly appointed and qualified as the guardian of John W. Grizzle, a non compos mentis; that on January 6, 1931, “the said R. F. Grizzle as guardian of John W. Grizzle * * * had on deposit the sum of $2,776.-74” ; that said “ward was a World War veteran,” and that “said R. F. Grizzle, as guardian of said John W. Grizzle, a non compos mentis, when the liquidation of said bank was commenced, had on…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Frisbie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- United States v. State Bank of NCSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Bramwell v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Beaston v. Farmers' Bank of Del.Supreme Court of the United States · 1838
- United States v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Estate of LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Robinson v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Spann v. First Nat. Bank of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
- Department of Public Welfare Ex Rel. Central State Hospital v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
- Derzis v. VafesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.