Case Name: Cole's Estate et al. v. Receiver First State Bank of Pittsboro, et al.
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Mississippi
Decision Date: 1919-03
Citations: 119 Miss. 789
Docket Number: No. 20607
Parties: Cole's Estate et al. v. Receiver First State Bank of Pittsboro, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Mississippi Reports
Volume: 119
Pages: 789–791

Head Matter:
Cole's Estate et al. v. Receiver First State Bank of Pittsboro, et al.
[81 South. 237,
No. 20607.]
1. BANKS and Banking. Receivership. Note. Interest.
Where the purchaser of road bonds delivered to a state bank which was a county depository in payment for the bonds, a note which had been given to the purchaser by the officers of the bank as security for a loan by the purchaser to the bank, and also certain collaterals which had been given to the purchaser as security for his loan to the bank, and afterwards the court upon the bank’s insolvency, refused to accept the note of the purchaser as payment for the bonds, and the receiver collected from the collaterals sufficients funds to pay the note which had been given the purchaser by the bank and the interest thereon. Ip such case the receiver must allow credit to the purchaser not only for the note which he had surrendered but also the interest thereon.
2. Appeal and Ekeoe. Subsequent appeal. Law of case.
The rule of law laid down on a former appeal as to, a federal question is subject to review on a subsequent appeal.
Appeal from the chancery court of Calhoun county.
HoN. J. G. McGoweN, Chancellor.
Suit by the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company against the estate of G. "W. Cole, deceased, and the National City Bank, and another.
From the decree rendered the estate of G. W. Cole deceased and the National City Bank, appeal.
For statement of facts see 116 Miss. 239.
No brief of counsel found in the record.
W. D. & J. B. Anderson, B. J. West, J. E. Holmes, Wilson & Armstrong and C. H. Hale, for appellants.
Thos. L. Haman, Jr., and W. M. Hall, for appellees.

Opinion:
HoldeN, J.,
delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.
This case is bere on appeal for tbe second time. For a full statement and discussion of tbe facts, and tbe law as announced by tbis court governing tbis controversy, we refer to tbe decision of tbe case styled U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. et. al. v. First State Bank et al., 116 Miss. 239, 76 So. 747.
Under this decision the cause was reversed and remanded, with a full announcement of tbe law to be applied by tbe lower court in settling tbe different controversies between tbe several parties to tbe litigation. Tbe lower court applied tbe legal principles laid down in tbe former opinion, and we find no new facts or new questions raised in tbe present appeal, except that on tbe second bearing before tbe chancellor it appeared that tbe receiver of tbe First State Bant bad collected sufficient funds on tbe collateral notes surrendered to tbe First State Bank by G. W., Cole to pay tbe Cole estate tbe amount of money due it by said First State Bank and also tbe interest thereon to tbe time of payment. But the chancellor declined to allow tbe interest amounting to about one thousand, eight, hundred dollars, on tbe six thousand dollar note due by tbe bank to tbe estate of G. W. Cole.
We think it was error in not allowing tbis interest, as well as tbe principal; and to that extent tbe decree is reversed, and a decree for both the principal and interest due by tbe First State Bank to tbe estate of G. W. Cole will be entered bere. We see no other error in tbe record, and we adhere to tbe law of tbe case as announced by tbis court on tbe former appeal.
Tbe other branch of tbe case, which is tbe controversy between tbe United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company and tbe National City Bank of Memphis, is fully discussed and decided in tbe former opinion of tbis court; and while tbis branch of tbe case presents a federal question, and for that reason is subject to review here again on the question of law, we have decided, after a careful consideration of the rule of law announced with reference to the liability of the National City Bank to the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, that the conclusion reached and announced in the former opinion is sound and will not be disturbed on this appeal.
On account of error in calculation, one thousand, sis hundred dollars of the amount decreed against the National City Bank in favor of the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company must be remitted here by the latter party; the correct amount of recovery being eleven thousand, one hundred, twenty-eight dollars and seventy-four cents.
The decree of the lower court is affirmed in all respects, except as indicated herein.
Affirmed in part, and reversed in part, and decree entered here.
Affirmed in part.
Reversed in part.