First Nat Bank of San Jose v. State of California, No. 276

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtMcREYNOLDS
Citation43 S.Ct. 602,67 L.Ed. 1030,262 U.S. 366
PartiesFIRST NAT. BANK OF SAN JOSE v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al
Docket NumberNo. 276
Decision Date04 June 1923

262 U.S. 366
43 S.Ct. 602
67 L.Ed. 1030
FIRST NAT. BANK OF SAN JOSE

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al.

No. 276.
Submitted April 13, 1923.
Decided June 4, 1923.

Mr. S. F. Leib, of San Jose, Cal., for plaintiff in error.

Mr. U. S. Webb, Atty. Gen., of San Francisco, Cal., for defendants in error.

Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Section 1273, California Code of Civil Procedure, declares:

'All amounts of money heretofore or hereafter deposited with any bank to the credit of depositors who have not made a deposit on said account or withdrawn any part thereof or the interest and which shall have remained unclaimed for more than 20 years after the date of such deposit, or withdrawal of any part of principal or interest, and where neither the depositor or any claimant has filed any notice with such bank showing his or her present residence, shall, with the increase and proceeds thereof, escheat to the state.'

It further directs

Page 367

the Attorney General to institute actions in the superior court for Sacramento county against banks and depositors to recover all such amounts——

'and if it be determined that the moneys deposited in any defendant bank or banks are unclaimed as hereinabove stated, then the court must render judgment in favor of the state declaring that said moneys have escheated to the state and commanding said bank or banks to forthwith deposit all such moneys with the state treasurer, to be received, invested, accounted for and paid out in the same manner and by the same officers as is provided in the case of other escheated property.'

Section 15 of the Bank Act (St. 1909, p. 90) contains similar provisions.

In a proceeding under section 1273 the trial court gave judgment for the state against plaintiff in error for the amount credited upon its books to P. A. Campbell for more than 20 years, and this was affirmed by the Supreme Court. State v. Anglo & London Paris Nat. Bank of San F ancisco, 186 Cal. 746, 200 Pac. 612. We are asked to hold that, so construed and applied, this section conflicts with the laws of the United States touching national banks and is therefore invalid.

The trial court found——

That for more than 20 years prior to the institution of this action there was on deposit with the said defendant bank to the credit of P. A. Campbell the sum of $1,192.25; that for more than 20 years prior to the institution of this action the said P. A. Campbell has not made any deposit to the credit of said account, or withdrawn any part thereof or any interest or dividends accruing thereon; that the said money and account so deposited and all accruing interest and dividends thereon have remained unclaimed for more than 20 years after the same were so deposited or credited, and after the withdrawal of any part of the principal or interest or dividends, and said moneys and account now are unclaimed; that the date of the last transaction in connection

Page 368

with the said deposit of the said P. A. Campbell, whether by deposit or withdrawal of any portion of such account, or by withdrawal of any interest or dividends accruing thereon, was on the 10th day of November, 1880; that neither the said depositor nor any claimant of the said deposit or account, or of any interest or dividends thereon, has filed any notice with the said defendant bank showing the present...

To continue reading

Request your trial
57 practice notes
  • National banks: Authority provided by American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act, and other miscellaneous amendments,
    • United States
    • Federal Register February 07, 2003
    • 7 Febrero 2003
    ...efficiency as federal agencies or conflict with the paramount law of the United States.''); First National Bank of San Jose v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 368-369 (1923) (``[National banks] are instrumentalities of the federal government. * * * [A]ny attempt by a state to define their duties ......
  • Bank activities and operations: Electronic banking,
    • United States
    • Federal Register May 17, 2002
    • 17 Mayo 2002
    ...Marquette Nat. Bank of Minneapolis v. First of Omaha Serv. Corp., 439 U.S. 299, 314-315 (1978); First Nat. Bank of San Jose v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 369 (1923) (``[A]ny attempt by a state to define [national banks'] duties or control the conduct of their affairs is void, whenever it con......
  • Perdue v. Crocker National Bank, S.F. 24591
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • 18 Julio 1985
    ...the state was preempted by section 24 because it impeded the bank's ability to attract deposits. (First National Bank v. California (1923) 262 U.S. 366, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030.) But as the court later explained in Anderson Nat'l Bank v. Luckett, supra, 321 U.S. 233, 250, 64 S.Ct. 599, ......
  • Montgomery v. Bank of America Corp., No. CV 07-1204 CASAJWX.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Central District of California
    • 24 Septiembre 2007
    ...their duties. Bank of Am. v. City & County of S.F., 309 F.3d Page 1111 551, 561 (9th Cir.2002) (citing First Nat. Bank v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 369, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030 The Supreme Court has created exceptions to the general rule that national banks' enumerated and incidental po......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
53 cases
  • Perdue v. Crocker National Bank, S.F. 24591
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • 18 Julio 1985
    ...the state was preempted by section 24 because it impeded the bank's ability to attract deposits. (First National Bank v. California (1923) 262 U.S. 366, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030.) But as the court later explained in Anderson Nat'l Bank v. Luckett, supra, 321 U.S. 233, 250, 64 S.Ct. 599, ......
  • Montgomery v. Bank of America Corp., No. CV 07-1204 CASAJWX.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Central District of California
    • 24 Septiembre 2007
    ...their duties. Bank of Am. v. City & County of S.F., 309 F.3d Page 1111 551, 561 (9th Cir.2002) (citing First Nat. Bank v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 369, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030 The Supreme Court has created exceptions to the general rule that national banks' enumerated and incidental po......
  • American Bankers Assciation v. Lockyer, No. CV.S-02-1138 FCD JFM.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • 23 Diciembre 2002
    ...the National Bank Act, or impair the efficiency of national banks to discharge their duties." Id. (citing First Nat'l Bank v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 369, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030 (1923)). Alternatively, "[s]tate regulation of Page 1013 is permissible when it `does not prevent or signi......
  • Bank of America v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 00-16355.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 25 Octubre 2002
    ...purposes of the National Bank Act, or impair the efficiency of national banks to discharge their duties. First Nat. Bank v. California, 262 U.S. 366, 369, 43 S.Ct. 602, 67 L.Ed. 1030 (1923). The supremacy of the federal government in regulating national banks has long been The National Bank......
  • 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