Assaria State Bank of Assaria v. Joseph Dolley

Citation31 S.Ct. 189,55 L.Ed. 123,219 U.S. 121
Decision Date03 January 1911
Docket NumberNo. 617,617
PartiesASSARIA STATE BANK OF ASSARIA, Citizens Bank of Axtell, et al., Appts., v. JOSEPH N. DOLLEY, as Bank Commissioner of the State of Kansas, and Mark Tulley, as State Treasurer of the State of Kansas
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Messrs. John Lee Webster, Chester I. Long, James Willis Gleed, John L. Hunt, and B. P. Waggener for appellants.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 121-124 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Fred S. Jackson, A. C. Mitchell, G. H. Buckman, and John Marshall for appellees.

[Argument of Counsel from page 124 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a bill in equity brought by many state banks of Kansas to prevent the enforcement of the Kansas law providing for a bank depositors' guaranty fund. The defendants demurred. The circuit court, while holding the act unconstitutional, dismissed the bill on the ground that the appellants did not show that their rights under the Constitution were infringed, and therefore did not state a case within the jurisdiction of the court. 175 Fed. 365, 375, 381, 382. The ground of complaint was that the law imposed certain conditions upon sharing the benefits and burdens of contributors to the guaranty fund, that the appellants would not or could not contribute, and that unless they did, the effect of the law would be to drive them out of business. It was complained also that whereas theretofore the plaintiffs would have been entitled to share pro rata in the assets of an insolvent bank to which they had given credit, now depositors with such of their debtors as should go into the guaranty system would be preferred. Again, various conditions of the scheme not affecting the plaintiffs were pointed out as unreasonable and arbitrary, and the whole act was alleged to be unconstitutional and void. There was added a charge that the act required taxation to meet the expenses of carrying out the scheme. To all this the court replied that so far as the plaintiffs were concerned, it did not appear that they could not change their condition so as to enable themselves to contribute, and that the possible preference of other creditors was put as a pure speculation, it not being averred that any guaranteed bank indebted to any of the plaintiffs had failed, to which it might be added that the plaintiffs are free to withdraw their credits and collect their debts now. The charge as to taxation did not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Ravitz v. Steurele
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • December 21, 1934
    ... ... in the act, shall engage in this state in making loans in the ... amount of value of ... the bank. Commonwealth v. Donoghue, 250 Ky. 343, 63 ... the same circumstances. Assaria State Bank v ... Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, 31 ... ...
  • State ex rel. Collins v. Crescent Cotton Oil Co.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • January 14, 1918
    ... ... Lincoln Trust ... Co., 144 Mo. 528; Franklin Nat'l Bank v ... Whitehead, 149 Ind. 560, 39 L. R. A. 724, 67 Am ... & E. Ann. Cas ... 1175; Assasria State Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, ... 55 L.Ed. 123; Ingle v. O'Malley, 219 ... ...
  • Stoll v. Pacific Coast S.S. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • April 28, 1913
    ... ... Washington law for the compensation, by the state, of ... injured workmen. This law recites and ... 551, 13 Ann.Cas. 957; Noble State ... Bank v. Haskell, 219 U.S. 104, 31 Sup.Ct. 188, 55 ... 48, ... 97 P. 590; Assaria State Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S ... 121, 31 ... ...
  • Hunter v. Colfax Consol. Coal Co.
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • November 24, 1915
    ...is upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Noble's Case (Guaranty of Deposit Act), and followed in Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, 31 Sup. Ct. 189, 55 L. Ed. 123, upholding compulsory taxation of the banks concerned. The Jensen Case, the most recent pronouncement by the Court of A......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT