IN RE: OUNJUIAN'S ESTATE. HINES et al. v. MILLER.
It is suggested by petitioner that in rendering our decision we failed to take into consideration a statute relating to deposit in banks, of money, held by bonded fiduciaries. Stats. 1915, p. 1438; Deering's Gen. Laws, 1931 Ed., Act 8317.
The agreement between the guardian and the surety, providing for deposit of the funds, and for joint control thereof, was not made according to the statute. It did not provide for the deposit of such funds “in such manner as to prevent the withdrawal of such money and assets or any part thereof, without the written consent of such surety or sureties, or an order of court, or a judge thereof, made on such notice to such surety or sureties as such court or judge may direct.”
The petition for rehearing is denied.