Legal Opinion
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Pottorff
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 5, 1934No. 128PublishedCited by 158 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brandeis
The main question for decision is whether a national bank has power to pledge a part of its assets to secure a private deposit.
The First National Bank of El Paso, Texas, failed on September 4, 1931, and S. O. Pottorff was appointed receiver. The Texas & Pacific Railway Company was then, and long had been, a depositor. To secure it as such the bank had, in January, 1931, pledged $50,000 Liberty Bonds and held them for the Railway in the Trust Department of the bank. The balance in the Railway’s reg-. ular checking account at the time of the failure was $54,646.94. Of this claim it made proof…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Cunningham v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Thomas v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Davis v. Elmira Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- First National Bank in St. Louis v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by158 opinions
- Scholes v. LehmannCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
- Deitrick v. GreaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Merrill v. Abbott (In Re Independent Clearing House Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · 1984
- Lewis v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Scholes v. LehmannCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
153 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.