Citicorp v. Currie
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WEBB, Judge.
The appellants first contend the Commissioner’s decision should be reversed because the statute he relied upon, G.S. 53-229, violates Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States and Article I, sections 19, 32, and 34 of the Constitution of North Carolina. These issues have been resolved in the recent decision of State ex rel. Banking Commission v. Citicorp Savings Industrial Bank of North Carolina (Proposed), 74 N.C. App. 474, 328 S.E. 2d 895 (1985). That decision held that G.S. 53-229 required the dismissal of Citicorp’s application to form an industrial bank in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Allied Structural Steel Co. v. SpannausSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Cummings v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Britt v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- State ex rel. Utilities Commission v. Buck Island, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
- Britt v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- N.C. Indian Cultural Ctr., Inc. v. SandersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019