Majority
Headnote
1. Banks and banking; appointment of receiver of State bank ; application of stockholders.] Although a bank organized under the State laws has power to issue bank bills to circulate as money, that fact does not render it amenable to the provisions of chapter 6, of the general banking act (L. 1882, c. 409), and where it appears upon an application for a receiver of an insolvent State bank, that such bank has not issued during the last twenty-four years, bank bills or paper credits to be circulated as money, and that the period of redemption for bank bills theretofore issued by it has long since expired under the statute, the court has no power to appoint a receiver under section 134 of the general banking act, upon the application of stockholders holding more than one-tenth of the capital stock; but a receiver may be appointed upon the application of the attorney-general under §§ 1785 and 1788 of the code of Civil Procedure.[2]Two separate proceedings have been instituted to effect substantially the same ends, one by certain stockholders to secure the appointment of a receiver under the general act relating to banks, banking and trust companies (Laws of 1882, chap. 409), the other by the Attorney General to obtain a decree dissolving the corporation pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (1785 and 1788), and incidental hereto to secure pendente lite the appointment ■of a temporary receiver.
It is conceded by all in interest that under one or the other of these proceedings a receiver should be appointed. It is important, however, in view of the great interests involved, that the order appointing a receiver should be regular and valid beyond dispute, so that no question can arise as to the title of the receiver so appointed. Were it not that a serious, and, I think, fatal objection is made as to the right of the Court to appoint under the Banking act of 1882, I should have been inclined to avail myself of the provisions of that act, for, in addition to other benefits, it would not have involved the destruction of the ■corporation or corporate franchise at the termination of the proceedings. In the action of the Attorney General, brought as it is for the dissolution of the corporation, the final judgment will destroy the corporate franchise.
In the Attorney General’s action, however, no question can arise or doubt exist as to the validity of any appointment made thereunder. On the other hand, an examination of the Banking act under which the Tefft application is made has satisfied me that chapter VI. of the act applies only- to the banking corporations actually issuing bank notes, or any kind of paper credits' which circulate as money. Chapter VI., with the exception of the thirty-second section, is a re-enactment ■of chapter 226 of the Laws of 1849, which was entitled
The question here presented has been indirectly passed upon in the case of the Empire City Bank ( 6 Abb. Pr. 386 ). There the question presented was whether under the act of 1849 (which has been re-enacted, as stated in the chapter under discussion) to enforce the personal liability of stockholders of an insolvent bank, where the objection was made that it did not affirmatively appear that the bank was an association or corporation “ issuing bank notes to circulate as money.” Held that the objection was well taken, and that that fact must affirmatively appear in order to confer jurisdiction on the Court. By parity of reason, it would seem, therefore, that although the North River Bank has in common with all other banking institutions organized under the State law, power
It is proper, moreover, that I should say that the objection made as to the effect upon depositors is not well taken. While it is true that formerly a temporary receiver appointed in an action brought by the Attorney General had power only to collect, preserve and hold the property of the corporation, and was not authorized to pay out any moneys until final judgment, this has been changed. Section 1789 of the Code, provides that a temporary receiver shall be subject to the control of the Court, and when specially directed so to do, may make distribution among depositors, creditors and stockholders. I11 the order therefore appointing a receiver, a provision should be inserted that the receiver have leave, pursuant to section 1789, when he has sufficient funds, to apply to the Court to make distribution thereof among the depositors, and this will enable the receiver, from time to time, as moneys come into his hands, to speedily pay all depositors of the bank without obliging them to
Ordered accordingly.