Farmers & Merchants Bank (Leeds, ND)

Episode Information

Episode UID
77015071483
Episode Type
Suspension โ†’ Closure
Bank Type
state
Bank ID
7701507 routing
Routing Number
77-0150
Start Date
July 23, 1923
Location
Leeds, North Dakota (48.289, -99.438)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini (chosen from majority vote of a three-model LLM ensemble)
Short Digest
9d055084450f2fdc

Response Measures

None

Description

Closure reported in 1923; by 1927 a receiver (L. R. Baird) is litigating for the bank.

Events (2)

1. July 23, 1923 Suspension
Cause Details
Bank listed among Class 'B' closed banks in guaranty fund announcement; specific trigger not given.
Newspaper Excerpt
was July 23 closed failed 1923
Source
newspapers
2. April 9, 1927 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
L. R. Baird, as Receiver of Farmers and Merchants Bank of Leeds
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (4)

Article from The Bismarck Tribune, July 20, 1925

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

CLOSED BANK DEPOSITORS TO GET DIVIDENDS More Than $100,000 Will Be Paid by State Guaranty Fund Commission READY IN THIRTY DAYS All Claims of Less Than Twelve Dollars to Be Settled in Full Dividends estimated in excess of $100,000 will be paid to depositors of banks which first and Sept. 30, was July 23 closed failed 1923, between it the guaranty coma statement announced mission in by commission issued fund today fund at its session here The recent guaranty voted "B" divi- indends to be assigned to Class stitutions. The return will amount to ten per cent upon guaranteed deposits. Ready in 30 Days, fund commission will to commence "The be guaranty ready these consider- claims upon days as a the banks have ation in number about and of thirty payment from date. not been completely audited, but will probably be finished by that time," it was stated F. W. Cathro. will be the Announcement by made where to the newspapers in the towns closed banks are situated or in counofficial papers shortly, and dewill all be in excess ty commission positors notified of be acceptance by the of and will to their Receiver's their send deposits in required Certifi- form cates after notification, and a of verification of claims in excess of $100, no special verification being required for claims of less than $100. under the rule of the commission. Notice to Depositors Persons whose claims have been held as not guaranty will receive at rejected registered eligible notice to address. known postoffice these comcan their mission Claims last against announce, banks. be the handled ble having with if more persons expedition claims and less the against trou- time the will simply await is received Inwhen banks notice letters by written them. made and rewhether or not considered. serves will garding quiries be simply their claims to slow the work of the of less than All up claims commission. $12.00 will be in full and will for not paid be drawn amounts dividend in of checks than $10.00, excepting cases are less so doing, it is less where amount. claims By than estimated that one-half "B" be included that probably in Class banks of the the will claims large thus saving work and a amount eliminated, of administration considerable amount of money in cost and expense. Class "B" Banks banks are in division: Farmers of Following "B" designated Bank Hurdsfield State Bank; Hickson Fessenden: Class Farmers State American & Bank: MerNew Rockford; Sanish; State Van Hook; chants State Bank, Bank, Bank, Scand. Citizens American State Bank, Tagus; Farmers State Bank. Sanish: Blaisdell State Bank; AmerBank, Burlington; Farmers State Bank of ers ican Bank, State Ray: Oriska; Bank, Farm- Farm- Dunn Hazen; Horace First Bank, ers Center; Bank, State Dawson; State Bank: First State Bank, Dunn Center: Farmers & Merchants Bank, Leeds; Farmers State Bank, Neche: Farmers & Merchants Bank, Overly; First State Bank, Epping: Merchants State Bank. Werner; Bottineau County Bank, Bottineau.


Article from The Bismarck Tribune, April 9, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

# High Court Rules on Jangula vs. Bobb Case Reversing the Burleigh county district court, the supreme court has held that where a defendant in a garnishment proceeding defends the action on the ground that the indebtedness of the garnishee is exempt under the law, it is not necessary that he set out in his answer a statement of the personal property owned by him. The decision was given in the case of Jacob L. Jangua vs. Philopena and Fred E. Bobb. When the case was heard in the Burleigh county district court a judgment for the plaintiff was entered but the supreme court reversed the decision. The supreme court has affirmed the Benson county district court in a case in which L. R. Baird, as receiver of the Farmers and Merchants Bank of Leeds, was plaintiff and the A. L. Johnson company was defendant. The case was appealed by Baird following an adverse decision of the lower court. The case grew out of adverse claims to certain land on which both the Bank and the Johnson company held liens.


Article from The Bismarck Tribune, April 11, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

FROM BENSON COUNTY L. R. Baird, as Receiver of Farmers & Merchants Bank of Leeds, North Dakota, a corporation, Plaintiff and 3 Appellant "


Article from The Bismarck Tribune, April 11, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

# FROM BENSON COUNTY L. R. Baird, as Receiver of Farmers & Merchants Bank of Leeds, North Dakota, a corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant -VS.- The A. L. Johnson Company, a corporation, Defendant and Respondent. SYLLABUS: In an action brought to recover damages for the conversion of grain, it appeared that the plaintiff was the assignee of a contract for the purchase of the land upon which the crop was grown and the defendant the owner of all the grain until the delivery of one-half thereof to it. The defendant filed a counterclaim based in part upon the payment of taxes on the land, which, under the terms of the purchase contract, were required to be paid by the vendee, the contract containing no stipulation making the amount paid by the vendor a lien on the crop. It is held: (1) In a suit for conversion the plaintiff must succeed on the strength of his own title. (2) Where it appears in the answer that the grain was raised under the terms of a certain contract binding upon the plaintiff and the defendant, a cause of action arising out of such contract is one "connected with the subject of the action" within 1913, defining the requisites of a counterclaim. (3) For reasons stated in the opinion, the cancellation of the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was without prejudice to the rights of the defendant alleged in the counterclaim. Appeal from the District Court of Benson County, Hon. C. W. Buttz, Judge. # AFFIRMED. Opinion of the court by Birdzell, Ch. J. Traynor & Traynor, Devils Lake, N. Dak., Attorneys for Appellant. L. L. Butterwick, Minnewaukan, N. Dak., and Sinness, Duffy & Wheeler, of Counsel, Devils Lake, N. Dak., Attorneys for Respondent.