Corn Exchange Bank v. Coler, 280 U.S. 218 (1930)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 280 U.S. 204, click here.

Corn Exchange Bank v. Coler


No. 36


Argued November 27, 1929
Decided January 6, 1930
280 U.S. 218

APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK

Syllabus

In view of its ancient origin, the New York procedure (Code, Cr.Pro., § 921-925) whereby the property of an absconding husband may be taken over and applied to the maintenance of his wife or children through judicial proceedings, cannot be held repugnant to the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, with respect to the husband or to a bank in which his money was deposited, although no notice to the husband, either actual or constructive, is provided by the statute. Ownbey v. Moran, 256 U.S. 94. P.222.

250 N.Y. 136 affirmed.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeals of New York which affirmed the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in sustaining a proceeding by Coler, as Commissioner of Public Welfare of the City of New York, to reduce to his possession a deposit held by the bank, for the purpose of applying it to the maintenance of the wife and child of the depositor, who had absconded. See also 132 Misc.Rep. 449.