268 F.Supp. 236 (N.D.Ga. 1967), Civ. A. 9846, Georgia Ass'n of Independent Ins. Agents, Inc. v. Saxon

Docket Nº:Civ. A. 9846
Citation:268 F.Supp. 236
Party Name:Georgia Ass'n of Independent Ins. Agents, Inc. v. Saxon
Case Date:March 31, 1967
Court:United States District Courts, 11th Circuit, Northern District of Georgia
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 236

268 F.Supp. 236 (N.D.Ga. 1967)

GEORGIA ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS, INC. (affiliated with National Association of Insurance Agents, Inc.) and Gerry R. Holden, Jr., Walter H. McGee, Charles A. Simons, Howard C. Kearns, Jr.

v.

James J. SAXON, Comptroller of the Currency of the United States of America.

Civ. A. No. 9846.

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia

March 31, 1967

Page 237

Gambrell, Harlan, Russell & Moye, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.

Barefoot Sanders, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles L. Goodson, U.S. Atty., Northern Dist. of Ga., Harland F. Leathers and Richard S. Baetty, Irvin Goldbloom, Robert Bloom, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendants.

LEWIS R. MORGAN, Chief Judge.

The plaintiffs in the above-styled action seek a declaratory judgment and injunction against an allegedly illegal act by the defendant James Saxon. Specifically, the act alleged to be illegal was the issuance of an administrative ruling by the defendant which authorized banks to carry on the business of insurance agents when such activity was incidental to banking transactions.

The instant case is presently before the Court on the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment under Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Title 12 U.S.C.A. § 92 provides that national banks which are located in places with a population of 5,000 or less may act as insurance agents under rules and regulations prescribed by the Comptroller. 1 The defendant's administrative ruling No. 7110 authorizes national banks to conduct the business of insurance agents in cities of any size, provided the writing of such insurance is incidental to banking transactions.

The essence of the plaintiffs' argument is that by authorizing national banks to act as insurance agents only in places with a population of 5,000 or less, Title 12 U.S.C.A. § 92 prohibits such activity by national banks in places with a population of more than 5,000. Their position is simply that the congressional grant of the power to act as insurance agents in places of 5,000 or less impliedly prohibits such activity in places with a population of over 5,000.

The defendant takes the position that 12 U.S.C.A. § 92 does not impliedly prohibit banks from acting as insurance agents in places with a population of more than 5,000, so long as the insurance written is incidental to banking transactions. The...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP