Skip to content


Shallenberger Vs. First State Bank of Holstein - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number219 U.S. 114
AppellantShallenberger
RespondentFirst State Bank of Holstein
Excerpt:
shallenberger v. first state bank of holstein - 219 u.s. 114 (1911) u.s. supreme court shallenberger v. first state bank of holstein, 219 u.s. 114 (1911) shallenberger v. first state bank of holstein, nebraska no. 445 argued december 8, 1910 decided january 3, 1911 219 u.s. 114 appeal from the circuit court of the united states for the district of nebraska syllabus following, and on the authority of, noble state bank v. haskell, ante, p. 219 u. s. 104 , sustaining the bank depositors' guaranty fund acts of oklahoma, held that a similar act of nebraska providing for a guaranty fund and prohibiting banking except by corporations formed under the act, is not unconstitutional. 172 f. 999 reversed. .....
Judgment:
Shallenberger v. First State Bank of Holstein - 219 U.S. 114 (1911)
U.S. Supreme Court Shallenberger v. First State Bank of Holstein, 219 U.S. 114 (1911)

Shallenberger v. First State Bank of Holstein, Nebraska

No. 445

Argued December 8, 1910

Decided January 3, 1911

219 U.S. 114

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

Syllabus

Following, and on the authority of, Noble State Bank v. Haskell, ante, p. 219 U. S. 104 , sustaining the Bank Depositors' Guaranty Fund Acts of Oklahoma, held that a similar act of Nebraska providing for a guaranty fund and prohibiting banking except by corporations formed under the act, is not unconstitutional.

172 F. 999 reversed.

The facts, which involve the constitutionality of the banking act of Nebraska, creating a depositors' guaranty fund, are stated in the opinion.

Page 219 U. S. 120

MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a suit by many banks to prevent the Banking Board of Nebraska from carrying out and enforcing an act similar to the Oklahoma statute just passed upon. It forbids banking except by a corporation formed under the act, and provides for a guaranty fund. The circuit court held the statute unconstitutional, and issued an injunction against the enforcement of it. 172 F. 999. For the reasons given in the foregoing case, the decree of the circuit court must be reversed.

Decree reversed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //