The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1911-11-20
ANOTHER FEATURE IN
ukoJA CASE Is
CONCLUDED j
Fr
The Supreme Court Reverses
rsmplston o. Question Of
Agents Claim

another feature 81 the Lakota bank
case was disposed OF by tho supreme
court Saturday when a, decision in
favor Ut l.. c. Widman, Great North
ern agent. was ordered. in his suit
against Geo. a. KellokHs us receiver of
the bank. The court holds that moneys
paid into the bank ~ Mr.. Widman'
We're IN tho nature Of purchases of
drafts. and not deposits, and that
therefore he is entitled t recover
This decision Of the supreme court
reverses that of Judge c. F. Templeton
when was IN w of the receiver.
Following is the syllabus:
L. G. Widman. plaintiff and appell-
ant, vs.. George A. Kellogg as receiver,
defendant and respondent.
l.. This appeal is before this court
on the judgement roll alone. The
findings. amon~ other things, are to
the effect that appellant was required
as a local agent of the G. N. r.. COM
pany and another, to transmit his re-
ceipts each day to his principals in
st. Paul; aid that it was his custom
to go to the bank and deposit such
receipts and .eceile therefor from the
bank I.:afts payable to the order Of
his pri:: ipals, and forthwith to trans
init tho same. 1t was also found that
on four days named ..:e followed, this
custom and that the drafts so pro.
cured and forwarded to st. Paul were
dtshonored because no funds were on
deposit with the correspondent of the
local bank with VIII / to pay them;
h a the officers of the bank knew Of
his employment and the purpose for
which such drafts were obtained. The
record contains no findings that he
kept any general account or drew
any checks OH the local bank.
Held. That in view of this custom
and the findings as a whole, the word
deposit must be construed as ihdicat-
ing the payment into the bank of
each days receipts in exchange for
drafts: and that he stood in relation
to the bank as a purchaser, for cash,
Of drafts.
2. Section 1850, r. c. 1905, pro-
hibits insolvent state banks from re-
ceiving any money. bank bills, notes
or currency. bills or drafts; and Sec
ton 1861 makes any official of an in
solvent bank who receives money,
ETC., guilty of q felony. The defend.
ant bank had been hopelessly insol-
vent for some time prior to the pur-
chase Of the drafts mentioned and It
had no funds with it's correspondent
bank out Of which they could be
paid: n such officials had no reason
to anticipate their being honored.
iASAAs Sitd cuN'ii iIlOISS was received
by the bank without consideration,
and. in effect. under false pretences
or representations; that thereby a
fraud was perpetrated upon appellant
the effect of which was to make the
bank q trustee OK malcticio of such
funds.
3. On q receiver being appointed
for such bank, in Il proceeding under
the statute to wind. up the affairs of
insolvent corporations, he had no
greater rights In such funds or mon
eys than those possessed by the in"
solvent bank, and succeeded tho bank
as Il trustee.
4. The fact that the bank closed
its doors within four business days
after the first of the transa ctions dcs-
cribed, and the next day after the last
one: and that money in more than
double the ainount Of the claim of ap.
pellant was turned over to the no.
cciver of the bank; and other ele.
lments Of the findings of the trial
court, lead to the conclusion that
and those received by the receiver
were enhanced by the transactions
described. -
5. When n trustee mingles trust
funds with his " and subsequently,
pays put n portion OF tho commingled
funds. it will he presumed that he
made his payments from that por-
ton of the fund belonging to himself
and retained the funds which did not
belong to him. except in so far as he
may distinguish What is his own the
whole funds will DO treated MS tho
trust property.
s. The trusteeship OF the bsnk and
of the receiver being established, it
being conceded that the moneys of an
pellant were commingled with the
funds Of the bank and respondents
having failed to show that moneys
paid out in tho meantime were the
original trust funds; and likewise
having failed to show that appellants
money was not included in that turn.
cd over to the receiver. appellant is
entitled to recover
Z. When such trust funds arc not
commingled with any Of the assets of
the bank, except the rash assets. the
preference Of appellant is limited to
the cash funds of which the receiver
took possession, when distinguishable
from the other assets Of the estate
going into his hands.