Case ID: how-pr_4/html/0447-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ernest Fiedler, appellant, vs. Ferdinand Suydam et al., respondents.
    
      —Decree affirmed.
    
    Gr. H. Mumford, for appellant;
    E. Darwin Smith, for respondents.
   This was a cause of claims to surplus moneys brought into court. No particular principle was settled by the decision. It was a question of priority of claims and the amount of interest to be allowed on the surplus, under a certain stipulation with the bank where it was deposited, and who were assignees to the second hen upon the fund. (Not reported.)