¶1This was a cause of claims to surplus moneys brought into court. No particular principle was settled by the decision. It was a question of priority of claims and the amount of interest to be allowed on the surplus, under a certain stipulation with the bank where it was deposited, and who were assignees to the second hen upon the fund. (Not reported.)
4 How. Pr. 447
Fiedler v. Suydam
Decided June 15, 1848
New York Court of Appeals · decided 1848-06-15
<p> —Decree affirmed. </p>
Decided 1848-06-15