Legal Opinion

Bank of California v. City of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 12, 1937PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, C. J.

The city contends that the rental of safe deposit vaults is not a function or power of a national bank as an agency of the United States government, as such powers and functions are set forth in the National Bank Act and the Federal Reserve Act and amendments thereto, nor is the rental of safe deposit vaults a necessary or integral part of the general banking business carried on by the respondent banks.

Plaintiffs contend that the city ordinance imposing the license fee has no application to national banks and that the officers and agents of the city of Portland have no power to enforce…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. Davis v. Elmira Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. Owensboro National Bank v. OwensboroSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  4. National Bank v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  5. First National Bank of San Jose v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bank of America, National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. LimaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1952
  2. Real Good Food Store, Inc. v. FIRST NAT. BK. OF Or.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. O'MALLEY v. Putnam Safe Deposit Vaults, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
  4. Bedford v. Colorado National BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1939
  5. Washington Bankers Ass'n v. Washington Mutual Savings BankWashington Supreme Court · 1979

1 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