First Nat. Bank of Capitol Hill v. Murray
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Markus v. Austin (Tex. App. 1926)
- Webster Groves Trust Company v. Saxon (8th Cir. 1966)
- Webster Groves Trust Co. v. Saxon (8th Cir. 1966)
- Community National Bank of Pontiac v. Gidney (District Court, E.D. Michigan 1961)
- Thomas v. National Bank of Commerce (Wash. 1936)
- Buchman v. Bensonhurst Nat. Bank (District Court, E.D. New York 1936)
- Copeland v. Melrose National Bank (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1930)
- First National Bank v. Souders (Cambria County Court of Common Pleas 1930)
- State ex rel. Dodd v. Hill (W. Va. 1919)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The First National Bank of Capitol Hill, Okl., complains of a judgment in a suit by the Comptroller of the Currency forfeiting its charter because its directors knowingly violated the national banking laws. Section 5239, Rev. St. (3 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3515).
The bank was chartered in 1909 with a capital of $25,000 to do business in the village of Capitol Hill, Okl., a suburb outside the corporate limits of Oklahoma City. Less than a month afterwards, by proceedings under the local laws, the limits of the city were enlarged to include the village. Capitol Hill had not exceeding 3,000 inhabitants; Oklahoma City a population of over 50,000. Thereupon the bank, desiring to remove its banking house to the business section of Oklahoma City within its original limits, applied to the Comptroller for permission to do so. The Comptroller refused to permit the change unless the bank increased its capital stock to at least $200,000, changed its name to Capitol Hill National Bank of Oklahoma City, and agreed to comply with the provisions of the law relating to reserves to be held by banks in reserve cities, Oklahoma City being of that character. The bank having declined to comply with these conditions and having removed its place of business to the location desired, the Comptroller brought action with the result above indicated.
The statutes relating to the situation provide as follows: The organization certificate of a national banking association must state the name adopted which is subject to the approval of the Comptroller. It must also state the place where its operations of discount and deposit are to be carried on, and, its usual business shall be transacted at an office or banking house in the place so specified. The reserve required to be maintained by a national bank in a nonreserve locality is 15 per cent, of its deposits, while in a reserve city it is 25 per cent. Generally a national bank cannot be organized with a capital less than $100,000, nor, in a city of more than 50,000 inhabitants, with a capital less than
The judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.