Legal Opinion
Hadlock v. State Bank of Millard County
Utah Supreme Court
Decided March 7, 1934No. 5355PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEAUP, Chief Justice.
Hadloek, the state bank commissioner, in pursuance of the Banking Act, Laws of Utah 1921, c. 23, as amended by Laws of Utah 1923, c. 33, took possession of the business and property of the State Bank of Millard County at Fillmore and proceeded to liquidate it. He, for the period from February 1 to March 15, 1932, filed a report in the district court in and for Millard county, showing an itemized statement or report of liquidation and expenses which he asked the court to approve and to permit the commissioner out of assets of the bank to pay the compensation and expenses…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Isaac v. MarcusNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Cunningham v. Commissioner of BanksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- In re the Union Bank of BrooklynAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
- State ex rel. Cowles v. SchivelyWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Riches v. Hadlock, Bank Com'r.Utah Supreme Court · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Powers v. IsleyArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- McCarten v. SandersonMontana Supreme Court · 1941
- Mayor of Ocean City v. JohnsonCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1984
- Jones v. Cox, JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1934
- In Re State Bank of Beaver CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.