The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-05-09
A BANK CASE.
Judge Hanfera Files an Opinion ~
to Jurfsdfction of Courts.


to Jurfsdfction Of Courts.
Judge Hanford yesterday handed down
an opinion in the case OF the County Of
Snohomish Vs. the Puget Sound National
Bank of Everett. A. j. Hayward ct al.
denying the motion TO dismiss the case,
and overriding the demurrers TO the bill.
The motion to dismiss the case was based
upon the ground that the superior court
OF Snohomish county. in which the suit
was originally brought, did not have juris-
dfcfion- In the opinion OF Judge Hanford
however, said court being a court of supe-
rior and general jurisdiction I'm common
law and equity cases, is a court OF COM
petent Jurisdiction for the trial OF the is
sues rendered by the averments Of the bill.
As a court OF equity having Jurisdiction
OF the parties. Ii had the power to remove
an unfaithful or incompetent trustee and
10 thereafter administer the trust for the
benefit of those having rights according to
the principles OF equity. The Jurisdiction
of Federal courts IN civil causes Is con-
current with the Jurisdiction OF state
courts, except in cases where the Federal
jurisdiction Is made exclusive by some
provision In the constitution or laws of
the United States. and the court had not
been referred TO any such provision appli-
cable to the case at issue. The jurisdic-
ton of the superior courts Is not barred by
the rule of law that An estate or property
In the custody OF one court can be inter-
fered with by process from another court.
not brought under the control or protec-
ton OF the Federal court by being taken
into custody by a receiver appointed by
the comptroller of the currency nor by
the transfer from the receiver to the agent
of the shareholders. The opinion cites a
case tStatIer VS.. California National Bank)
presented by the counsel for the defense,
which had been reversed by the supreme
court OF the United States, in which a writ
of certicrar had been granted. The opin-
ion of Chief Justice Fuller Is then quoted
In Its bearing on the case.
In the second page OF the opinion Judge
Hanford says: II find by the COM
plainant's statement or the case In the
bill OF complaint that the case is one OF
which this court might have taken origi-
nal jurisdiction as a suit OF a civil ma
ture arising under the laws of the United
States. II appears TO me TO be a suit
against an agent of the shareholders OF a
national hank. elected in a manner pro-
vided for by an act OF congress and au-
thorixed by the same act TO take from
a receiver the entire assets OF the bank,
remaining undisposed of. for the purpose
OF winding up the affairs of the banking
association. and TO that end empowered
by the same law TO prosecute and defend
actions. and also required to render a
final account OF receipts and vouchers
TO the United States circuit or district
court. for the district In which the hank
was located.
1.-THE object and purpose OF the suit"
the court found was TO restrain the
agent from proceeding to dispose OF the
property in his hands. held In his trust
capacity, and from settling and CON-
promising liabilities OF certain debtors OF
the bank and to take the whole OF the
remaining assets OF the bank out of his
hands 50 that the complainant, may real
ize therefron n sum OF money for which
II has a claim against the bank. The
bill calls for a discovery and for an ac-
counting by the agent and for the ap-
pointment OF a receiver 10 take the re-
naming assets into his custody. 10 the
end that the court having jurisdiction
OF the cause may have complete con-
troll OF the assets. and power TO dispose CT
the same. and distribute the proceeds. For
all practical purposes. this Is a suit 20
wind up the affairs OF an insolvent bank.
and Jurisdiction OF such cases Is con-
ferred upon the court by the laws OF the
United States defining the jurisdiction
OF circuit courts