Attorney General v. Bank of Michigan
Michigan Court of Chancery
Motion by complainant for a receiver, and on the part of the defendant for a modification of the injunction. The bill states that December 19, 1817, the bank of Michigan was incorporated, with capital of $100,000; was organized and went into operation.
Read the full summary
Motion by complainant for a receiver, and on the part of the defendant for a modification of the injunction. The bill states that December 19, 1817, the bank of Michigan was incorporated, with capital of $100,000; was organized and went into operation. That in accordance with the provisions in its charter, the capital was afterwards augmented to the amount of §500,000. That February 25, 1831, the charter was continued for twenty-five years from and after the first Monday in June, 1839. That ever since they commenced doing business, and down to the present time, they have had a banking house…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
Before proceeding to the examination of the facts disclosed by the pleadings in this cause, it will be necessary to examine "the statutory provisions which have a bearing upon the question presented. The jurisdiction of this court in this class of cases.is based upon and controlled by the statutes. It has no such jurisdiction at common law. The Attorney General vs. the Utica Ins. Co. 2 J. C. R. 371; Same vs. Bank of Niagara, 1 Hop. 354; Verplanck vs. Mercantile Ins. Co., 1 Edw. 87. in the last mentioned case the Chancellor says : “ After such repeated decisions expressly…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Verplanck v. Mercantile InsuranceNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Attorney-General v. President, Directors & Co. of the Bank of ColumbiaNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
3Cited by2 opinions
- Randel v. President of Chesapeake & Delaware CanalSuperior Court of Delaware · 1833
- National Bank v. LindsaySuperior Court of Delaware · 1910