Legal Opinion

Corstvet v. Bank of Deerfield

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1936PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed December 3, 1935 :

RosenbeRRY, C. J.

The plaintiff contends, first: That sec. 220.07 (16), Stats., does not apply to depositors who were such prior to the date of its passage, January 23, 1932; that if sec. 220.07 (16) is construed to apply to deposits made prior to the date of the act, it is unconstitutional and void because it impairs the obligation of the contract existing between the plaintiff and the bank. Second: The plaintiff likewise contends that so construed the statute is unconstitutional because in contravention of sec. 1 of the Fourteenth amendment…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. American Surety Co. v. BaldwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Hegeman Farms Corp. v. BaldwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Doty v. LoveSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. State ex rel. Globe Steel Tubes Co. v. LyonsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Hanauer v. Republic Building Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Nodell Investment Corp. v. City of GlendaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State Ex Rel. Martin v. City of JuneauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Federal Deposit Insurance v. American Bank Trust Shares, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1978
  5. Department of Natural Resources v. City of ClintonvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971

16 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