State Ex Rel. Hicks v. Corporation Commission
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- Masonic Foundation v. . Hood, Comr. of Banks (N.C. 1936)
- Trust Co. v. . Hood, Comr. of Banks (N.C. 1934)
- Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Hood (N.C. 1934)
- In re Trust Co. (N.C. 1933)
- In re Garner Banking & Trust Co. (N.C. 1933)
- Nettles v. People's Bank (S.C. 1932)
- Parker v. . Hood, Comr. of Banks (N.C. 1936)
- Parker v. Hood ex rel. Central Bank & Trust Co. (N.C. 1936)
- Thomas H. Briggs & Sons, Inc. v. Allen (N.C. 1934)
- Cocke v. Hood Ex Rel. Central Bank & Trust Co. (N.C. 1934)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
There is no error in the judgment in this action that the relator, W. L. Hicks, guardian of Glenn Hawkins, Joseph Hawkins and Hazel Hawkins, infants, recover of the defendants the sum of $3,000, with interest and costs.
There is error, however, in so much of the judgment as orders and adjudges that the relator has a preferred claim on the assets of the Farmers Bank and Trust Company, now in the hands of the Corporation Commission or its successor, the Commissioner of Banks of North Carolina, or of the defendant, John D. Biggs, liquidating agent. See Bank v. Corp. Com., ante, 382, 160 S. E., 360. Roebuck v. Surety *821 Company, 200 N. C., 196, 156 S. E., 531. Neither the relator nor the sureties on the bond of the Farmers Bank and Trust Company as guardian are entitled to preference in the distribution of its assets among' the creditors of the insolvent bank. The judgment as modified in accordance with this opinion is affirmed.
Modified and affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.