Price v. Abbott
| Citation | 17 F. 506 |
| Parties | PRICE, Receiver, v. ABBOTT. SAME v. COLSON. |
| Decision Date | 22 June 1883 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
S. B Ives, Jr., for defendants.
A. A Ranney, for plaintiff.
Before GRAY and NELSON, JJ.
These are two of a large number of actions brought, by direction of the comptroller of the currency, by the plaintiff, (a citizen of New Jersey,) as the receiver of the Pacific National Bank of Boston, (a corporation organized under the act of congress of June 3, 1865, c. 106, and having its banking-house at Boston,) appointed under the act of congress of June 30 1876, c. 156, by the comptroller of the currency, upon being satisfied of the insolvency of the bank, against sundry citizens of Massachusetts, stockholders in the bank, to recover their shares of an assessment, to the amount of 100 per centum on the par value of the shares, made by the comptroller of the currency to provide the money necessary to pay the debts and liabilities of the bank, under section 5151 of the Revised Statutes. The amount of the assessment sued for in the first action is $2,000; and in the second action, $300. Each of the defendants has moved to dismiss for want of jurisdiction: First, because the plaintiff sues only in the capacity of receiver of a national bank, organized under the laws of the United States, and heretofore doing business within the commonwealth and district of Massachusetts; second, because the plaintiff brings the action, as receiver for and in behalf of the bank, to enforce an alleged liability of the defendant to the bank, and has no personal or individual interest in the action, or in the cause of action; third, because the action is by the bank, and is not a suit or between the bank and the United States, or any of its officers or agents; and, by force of the act of congress of July 12, 1882, c. 290, Sec. 4, the jurisdiction of the action is confined to the courts of the commonwealth of Massachusetts.
We are of opinion that the motions cannot be supported upon either of the grounds assigned. The congress of the United States is authorized by the constitution to vest the appointment of such inferior officers as it may think proper in the president alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments. Article 2, Sec. 2. By the statutes of the United States the secretary of the treasury is the head of the department of the treasury, and the comptroller of the currency is the chief officer of a bureau in that department, charged with the execution of all laws passed by congress relating to the issue and regulation of a national currency secured by United States bonds, and he performs his duties under the general direction of the secretary of the treasury. Rev. St. Secs. 233, 234. Appointments of receivers of national banks, made by the comptroller of the currency, as provided by those laws, are to be presumed to be made with the concurrence or approval of the secretary of the treasury, and are made by the head of a department, within the meaning of the constitution.
By those laws a receiver of a national bank is required, under the direction of the comptroller of the currency, to take possession of all the property, books, and records of the bank, and to collect all debts due to it; is authorized, upon the order of a court of record of competent jurisdiction, to sell or compound bad or doubtful debts, and to sell all the real and personal property of the bank, 'and may, if necessary to pay the debts of such association, enforce the individual liability of the stockholders;' and he is required to 'pay over all money so made to the treasurer of the United States, subject to the order of the comptroller,' and to make report of all his doings to the comptroller, by whom the money is to be divided among the creditors of the bank. Rev. St. Secs. 5234, 5236.
The receiver, indeed, in one respect represents the bank, its stockholders, and its creditors; and neither he nor the comptroller of the currency represents the government, so far as to have authority to waive its exemption from liability to suit. Case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pufahl v. Parks Estate
...by the executor, under circumstances like those presented in the instant case. 5 Kennedy v. Gibson, 8 Wall. 498, 19 L.Ed. 476; Price v. Abbott (C.C.) 17 F. 506; Armstrong v. Trautman (C.C.) 36 F. 275; Brown v. Smith (C.C.) 88 F. 565; Stephens v. Bernays (D.C.) 41 F. 401, affirmed (C.C.) 44 ......
-
Bridges v. Stephens
...476; Bank v. Kennedy, 84 U.S. 19, 17 Wall. 19, 21 L.Ed. 554; United States v. Hartwell, 73 U.S. 385, 6 Wall. 385, 18 L.Ed. 830; Price v. Abbott, 17 F. 506; Armstrong v. Ettlesohn, 36 F. 209; and Ellis Little, 27 Kan. 707. "He is not the agent or representative of the parties, but is an impa......
-
Cent. Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. First Nat. Bank of Gering
......Myers v. Hettinger, 94 F. 370, 37 C. C. A. 369;Price v. Abbott [C. C.] 17 F. 506; Platt v. Beach, 2 Ben. 303, Fed. Cas. No. 11215; Stanton v. Wilkeson, 8 Ben. 357, Fed. Cas. No. 13299; Kennedy v. ......
-
Central National Bank of Lincoln v. First National Bank of Gering
...... of the United States, and the circuit court had undoubted. jurisdiction of the case. Myers v. Hettinger, 37. C.C.A. 369, 94 F. 370; Price v. Abbott, 17 F. 506;. Platt v. Beach, 2 Ben. 303, 19 F. Cas. 836, Fed. Cas. No. 11215; Stanton v. Wilkeson, 8 Ben. 357, 22. F. Cas. 1074, ......