Legal Opinion · Dissent

Appeal of Concerned Corporators of the Portsmouth Savings Bank

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 30, 1987No. 86-199Published

1DissentSouter, J.

I respectfully dissent from part III of the majority opinion. The majority conclude that the plan for Portsmouth Savings Bank’s conversion from mutual to stock form, with its immediate acquisition by Amoskeag Bank Shares, Inc., is unfair to Portsmouth’s depositors as a matter of law under N.H. Admin. Code Tru 505.03, and its adoption by Portsmouth’s trustees a violation of their fiduciary duty to the Bank’s depositors. The majority rest their conclusions on the Bank’s charter, and from its terms they proceed by a line of reasoning to which they find no impediment in existing law.

I, on the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Oregon v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and GynecologistsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Society for Sav. in Cleveland v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1955

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API