Legal Opinion
Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 2, 2003No. 02-306PublishedCited by 1,123 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stevens
The question in this case is whether an action filed in a state court to recover damages from a national bank for allegedly charging excessive interest in violation of both “the common law usury doctrine” and an Alabama usury statute *4may be removed to a federal court because it actually arises under federal law. We hold that it may.
Respondents are 26 individual taxpayers who made pledges of their anticipated tax refunds to secure short-term loans obtained from petitioner Beneficial National Bank, a national bank chartered under the National Bank Act. Respondents brought suit in an Alabama…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1908
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,123 opinions
- Watters v. Wachovia Bank, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Aetna Health Inc. v. DavilaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Vaden v. Discover BankSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Dutcher v. MathesonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Moore-Thomas v. Alaska Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
1,118 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.