Citations

Full opinion text

KNIGHT, District Judge.

On April 29, 1932, plaintiff deposited with the Citizens’ National Bank & Trust Company of Hornell, N. Y., the sum of $30,-000. Plaintiff contends that this was a special deposit, and it brings this action to recover $18,274.26 claimed to be the balance thereof, after the deduction of certain checks paid by the bank. It is the defendant’s claim that the aetion must be dismissed both because there is a defect in the party defendant and that the deposit is a general deposit to be paid pro rata with other creditors.

The bank closed its doors at noon on April 30,1932. The Comptroller of the Currency took charge on May 2,1932. On June 4, 1932, Horace Mizell became receiver of the bank and has continued to act as such at all times since.

In view of the decision at which the court arrives regarding the nature of - this deposit, it is not necessary to determine the question of any defect in the party, defendant.

For many years including and prior to 1932, the plaintiff did an extensive business at Hornell, N. Y., as the terminal of one of its railroad divisions and through the operation of shops. During these years the plaintiff had a semimonthly pay roll aggregating many thousand dollars and during the same time it had a general deposit account with the Citizens’ National Bank & Trust Company of Hornell, N. Y., made up through deposits coming from its railway service at that point, and deposits made directly through the main office of the plaintiff in varying amounts at different times, to make its deposit account sufficient to meet these pay rolls.

From 1917 to 1928, the' arrangement between the plaintiff and the bank .called for deposits; by" the plaintiff with the bank of amounts up to $50,000, as requested by the bank, to assist the bank to cash pay roll checks on each pay day. Thereafter arrangement was made for a decrease in the amount of this deposit to the definite sum of $25,000, and still later and in'.or about Au-, gust, 1931,.and continuing until April, 1932, at the instance of the plaintiff, these deposits, for the purposes aforesaid were discontinued. In April, 1932, on account-of reasons resulting ;fr