Louisville Banking Co. v. Paine
Louisville Banking Co. v. Paine
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court..
We fully approve the principle applied in Ryan v. Paine, 66 Miss. 678, and stand ready to apply it again in a like case, but this is a very different one.
Here there was no trust. Mayer, the customer of the Gattman & Co. bank, directed it to apply a portion of his deposit to the payment of specified claims thereafter to mature, and among these was that of the appellant. Gattman & Co. assented to this and provision for it was made by Mayer drawing his check' on Gattman & Co. for the required sum. The appellant was no party to this arrangement, and did not know of it when made. It was a mere direction by Mayer to Gattman & Co. to carry out his wishes with his funds. He had the legal right to revoke the arrangement, and this is destructive of all idea of a trust in favor of appellant. Van Eaton v. Napier, 63 Miss. 220; Trustees v. Pace, 15 Ga. 486, and citations; Mayer v. Bank, 51 Id. 325, and cases cited;
We have examined all the cases cited by counsel for the appellant, and after much consideration of this case feel no hesitation to affirm the decree.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Louisville Banking Co. v. R. Paine, Receiver
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Bank. Direction to pay debt. Insolvency. Trust. A customer of a bank directed it to apply a portion of his deposit to the payment of certain debts thereafter to mature, among them his debt to complainant, and drew his check for the requisite amount, which was charged to his account, and in due time the bank forwarded to complainant its New York check for the amount of the debt, but meantime failed, and the oheck was dishonored. Held, in a chancery suit by complainant to impress a trust upon the assets of the bank in the hands of its receiver, that, as complainant was not a party to the debtor’s arrangement, his direction to the bank was revocable and no trust was created.