
    The German National Bank, Respondent, v. Carnegie Trust Company et al., Appellants.
    
      German Nat. Bankv. Carnegie Trust Co., 172 App. Div. 158, affirmed.
    (Argued May 17, 1918;
    deicded June 11, 1918.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 11, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The respondent, the German National Bank, is a national banking corporation, doing business in the city of Cincinnati, Ohio, and the appellant, Carnegie Trust Company, up to January 7, 1911, was engaged in a banking business in the city of New York. The German National Bank and Carnegie Trust Company had entered into an agreement under which each bank was to act as agent for the other bank in its respective city for the collection of checks and drafts. Under this arrangement the respondent was to remit daily for any checks drawn on -banks in Cincinnati or contiguous territory sent to it by the Carnegie Trust Company, whether or not it had actually collected the checks. On January 3, 1911, the trust company sent to the plaintiff in Cincinnati for collection checks and drafts amounting to $2,955.40. Immediately upon receipt of these items and on January 5, 1911, the plaintiff mailed to the trust company its check for $2,953.92, the amount of the remitted checks less commissions. The check was received at the trust company’s office on January 7, 1911, after the superintendent of banks had taken possession of the trust company. The superintendent, finding this check in the mail, immediately caused it to be certified by the First National Bank. After suit brought by the superintendent of banks against the First National Bank on its certification the amount of the check was paid to the superintendent of banks and the plaintiff thereafter reimbursed the First National Bank. On January 7, 1911, the trust company owed the plaintiff $11,900.16 and the plaintiff owed the trust company $2,953.92, the amount of the checks and drafts remitted by the trust company for collection, thus leaving a balance of indebtedness of $8,946.24 in favor of the plaintiff against the trust company. In this action the question is whether the plaintiff bank has preserved its right to discharge its debt to the trust company by the application of the principle of equitable setoff, and whether it. can recover from the superintendent of banks the amount of the check mailed by it on January 5, 1911.
    
      Samuel S. Koenig and Oliver L. Goldsmith for appellants.
    
      Joseph M. Hartfield and Ernest G. Fifield for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cuddeback, Cardozo, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Not sitting: McLaughlin, J.  