Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-08-30

Supreme Court of North Carolina.
April %. 1899.
y BANK MAY APPLY DEPOSITS TO
y DEBT OF AN INSOLVENT DE-
POSITOR, WHETHER 1T Is DUE
Ok NOT.
DEPOSITS BY 4 SURVIVING PART
NER MAY BE APPLIED TO y
DEBT OF THE FIRM.
DEPOSITS ON BEHALF OF y FIRM
CANNOT BE APPLIED TO y DEBT
OF y DECEASED PARTNER. NOR
INDIVIDUAL DEPOSITS OF y
PARTNER TO y DEBT OF THE,
FIRM.
This was sui; by plaintiff as sur
ViVinS partner 10 recover a deposit.
There Was i judgment for defendant
and plaintim appealed.
The court says:
\ bank has the right to apply the
debt due by il for deposits to any in
dcbtcdness by the depositor in the
same right, L. the bank. provided such
Indebtedness To- the bank has matured.
Even If the Indebtedness To the bank
had not maturcd. if the depositor be-
came insoveni, tho bank. by virtue of
the right OF equitable Get OF. may ap-
ply the deposits with il of such debtor
10 his indebtedness. The money dcpos-
itcd by iiodgin as surviving partner
was kept under The same heading in
the banks books. as before the death
of l.unn, and was merely a continual
ton Of the old line OF deposits. This
would have been equally true if the
deposits. after The death OF Lunn. had
been made in the name of "Hodgin.
surviving partner
In either event d4nQcftv v-.-c i,,
behalf of tho firm. and were in the
same IShi as the note held by the bank
AGAINST said firm; and on the insolven-
cy of the firm the bank had the right
20 aiPly the deposit made by The sur
NiNinS partner in behalf of the firm TO
the Indebtedness of the firm. whether
in"turcd 81 not. If the surviving
PARTNER had made the deposit a spe-
cial deposit. or if there had been an
agreement with the bank that these de-
debtedncss of the firm to the bank
then the banks right Of set off would
have been tolled. But there was no
evidence To that effect. |; is true that
deposits made by an executor or adj
mnistrator in a bank cannot be an
Piled TO the Indebtedness To the bank
Of the deceased Eut that is because
the personal representative holds the
funds Of the estate for the payment of
the debts in the order prescribed bv
statute ana tncn pro rata in each
class. which would be disturbed if the
bank could apply the funds deposited
by the executor or administrator to tho
indebtedness due to it by the deceased
though The deposits nj tho death of the
tcstator could be applied to any in
dehtcdnosS of his then due. II is other
Wise rs to the surviving partner who
merely continues the business for the
purpose of winding IL up. and of whom
the law does not require thc applica zion
pf the FUNDS in his hands "a the debts
in any prescribed order. The bank had
~" Isn't, however. to apply the deposits
on behalf OF the firm. whether made
during its existence or by the surviving
partner. 10 the indebtedness held by Il
against one of tho partners. ana it
could mako no difference that this was
the note of one partner indorsed by the
other. Ii was an individual indebted
ness. and partnership deposits could
not be applied to it. Though each
partner is Scverally responsible for
The entire ondcbtodncss of the firm. vet
Notwithstanding that fact. the individ
uai deposits OF Il partner cannot he an
piled To the indcb;cjncs Of the FIRM.
to the bHnE- Tho plaintiff is entitled
10 recover the excess of the DEPOSITS
above the Indebtedness of the firm
with interest from date OF demand
New trial.