DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., 64 So. 806.

15 citing documents.

  • In Re Standard Homestead Ass'n 22 So. 2d 119 La. 1945
    905 ; Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • Wren v. Brock 8 So. 2d 763 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    See Young, State Bank Examiner, *Page 766 v. Teutonia Bank Trust Company, , 64 So.
  • Brock v. Citizens State Bank & Trust Co. 182 So. 679 La. 1938
    In the case of Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Company, , 64 So.
  • In Re Interstate Trust & Banking Co. 176 So. 1 La. 1937
    The trial judge rejected the contention of opponents that they were entitled tó a preference by virtue of a trust'relationship *237 or equitable lien on the authority of Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Company, , 64 So.
  • In Re Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. 169 So. 464 La. 1936
  • Daugherty v. Canal Bank & Trust Co. 158 So. 366 La. 1934
    In the case of Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • Tropical Printing Co. v. Union Title Guarantee Co. 157 So. 534 La. 1934
    ottom Case, therefore, is not at all like the case before us. Two other decisions which the receivers rely upon to support their argument that the fund in the trustee account became mingled with the funds of the insolvent corporation, and that the title to the fund in the trustee account thereby passed from the note holders to the insolvent corporation, are Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • Daugherty v. Canal Bank & Trust Co. in Liquidation 154 So. 681 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
    Defendants assuming that the admission as to what the assistant trust officer of Canal Bank & Trust Company would swear, if called as a witness, about the nonsegregation of the funds in question and the commingling of same with the funds of the bank, would be taken as establishing the commingling, cites us to the case, Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • In Re Canal Bank & Trust Co. in Liquidation 154 So. 498 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
    407 ; Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • Ittman v. Kracke & Flanders Co. 127 So. 106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
    ale must be distributed among them ratably, unless there exists among the creditors some lawful causes of preference.” Article 3183, R. C. C. “Lawful causes of preference ' are privilege and mortgages.” Article 3184, R. C. C. “Privilege can be claimed only for those debts to which it is expressly granted in this Code.” Article 3185, R. C. C. In the case of Young vs. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co., , 64 So.
  • Sabine Canal Co. v. Crowley Trust & Savings Bank 113 So. 754 La. 1927
    The court said, quoting from the previous case of the same style in , 64 So.
  • Shields v. Michel 1 La. App. 603 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
    Ann. 109 ; Young vs. Teutonia Bank and Trust Co., ; 64 South.
  • Succession of Harris 14 Teiss. 445 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1917
    There is nothing contrary to these principles in the Teutonia Bank cases, , 887 and 135 La.
  • Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co. 64 So. 983 La. 1914
    806 , , recently decided, we said: “The custom of banks is to mingle collection money with their general funds, and to treat it as their own, and to send their own checks in remittance.
  • Young v. Teutonia Bank & Trust Co. 64 So. 984 La. 1914