Austin S. & L. Ass'n v. First Nat. Bank of Stewartville

133 N.W.2d 505, 270 Minn. 208, 1965 Minn. LEXIS 783
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJanuary 29, 1965
Docket39304
StatusPublished

This text of 133 N.W.2d 505 (Austin S. & L. Ass'n v. First Nat. Bank of Stewartville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Austin S. & L. Ass'n v. First Nat. Bank of Stewartville, 133 N.W.2d 505, 270 Minn. 208, 1965 Minn. LEXIS 783 (Mich. 1965).

Opinion

Thomas Gallagher, Justice.

Certiorari 1 on the relation of First National Bank of Stewartville, a corporation; First National Bank of Blooming Prairie, a corporation; Farmers & Merchants State Bank of Blooming Prairie, a corporation; and Minnesota Bankers Association, seeking reversal of an order of Gerald L. Bryan, commissioner of banks of the State of Minnesota, 2 *210 which approved an amendment to the bylaws of respondent Austin Savings & Loan Association, a Minnesota savings and loan association, which provided for the establishment of a branch office and facilities for the conduct of its business at Stewartville, Minnesota. It is the contention of relators that a savings, building, and loan association such as respondent, organized and operating under Minn. St. c. 51, has no authority or right to establish the branch office described. 3

*211 On May 22, 1963, respondent filed with the commissioner of banks the application wherein it sought approval of an amendment to its bylaws which would authorize it to establish the branch location at Stewartville. Stewartville is 36 miles from Austin. It is situated in Olmsted County, which is contiguous to Mower County in which Austin is located. 4 Shortly after this application was filed, the District Court of Mower County, upon motion of relators, issued an ex parte order temporarily restraining the commissioner from proceeding under the application described. After a hearing on relators’ motion for a temporary injunction, the district court made its order terminating the temporary restraining order and denying the motion for a temporary Injunction. Thereupon the commissioner upon due notice to all parties conducted a public hearing on respondent’s application, at which all parties were present. Based upon evidence submitted therein, he made findings in substance as follows:

The officers and directors of the Austin Savings & Loan Association are of good moral character and financial integrity and there is a rea *212 sonable public demand for the Austin Savings & Loan Association in Stewartville, Minnesota; and there is a reasonable probability of its usefulness and success there. The probable volume of business in the locality at Stewartville is sufficient to insure and maintain the solvency of the Austin Savings & Loan Association and of other existing financial institutions in that locality without endangering the safety of or injuring any existing financial institutions there.

The members of the Austin Savings & Loan Association have duly approved an amendment to its bylaws providing:

“A. The principal office of the association shall be in the City of Austin, County of Mower and State of Minnesota. It shall confine its field of operation to Mower County and those immediately contiguous thereto and in any other additional area within a fifty mile radius from its home office. In the event that the territory of this association is enlarged as provided by the laws of the State of Minnesota, this association may conduct its operations throughout such enlarged area.
“B. The association may establish branch offices and facilities in sjí * *
“1. Village of Stewartville, Olmsted County, Minnesota * *

Based upon such findings, on October 7, 1963, the commissioner ordered:

“That the above amendment to the by-laws of the Austin Savings & Loan Association of Austin, Minnesota, is approved as to form and legality.
“That in accordance with the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions the above amendment to the by-laws of the Austin Savings & Loan Association of Austin, Minnesota, is approved.”

It is relators’ contention that there is no statutory authority, either under the Savings, Building and Loan Act (Minn. St. c. 51) or otherwise, for a state-chartered local savings, building, and loan association such as respondent to establish branches; and that accordingly the commissioner of banks was without power to make the order authorizing respondent to do so.

1. We are of the opinion that the statutes above set forth disclose *213 ample legislative authority for the establishment of branch offices by local savings, building, and loan associations organized under c. 51. Thus, § 51.01, subd. 3, provides that “[a] ‘local association’ is one that confines its field of operation to the county in which is located its principal place of business and to counties immediately contiguous thereto.” (Italics supplied.) Likewise, § 51.36, as amended by L. 1963, c. 606, § 12, limits the field of operations of a “local association” organized under c. 51 to the county of “its principal place of business and those immediately contiguous thereto and any additional area within a 100-mile radius from the home office * * (Italics supplied.) The use of the term “principal place of business” in §§ 51.01, subd. 3, and 51.36 and the term “home office” in § 51.36, when considered in conjunction with § 51.34, subd. 1, 5 under which state-chartered savings, building, and loan associations are empowered with such other rights and privileges as may be incidental to or necessary for the accomplishment of their objectives and purposes, would appear to clearly manifest both a legislative intent that such associations might establish branch offices incidental to their operations in contiguous counties as well as in the area within a 100-mile radius from their home offices and legislative authorization for so doing. Here it seems clear that respondent’s maintenance of a branch office in Stewartville in contiguous Olmsted County, where it has in force and effect a substantial number of mortgage loans and where it is legally authorized to conduct its operations, would be incidental to or necessary for the accomplishment of its objectives and purposes and hence within the general authority granted to it under § 51.34, subd. 1. 6

*214 2. Relators cite Farmers & Mechanics Sav. Bank v. Department of Commerce, 258 Minn. 99, 102 N. W. (2d) 827, in support of their contention that in the absence of express statutory authority a savings, building, and loan association organized under c. 51 may not establish branch offices. The case cited is limited to a consideration of the powers of a savings bank operating under c. 50. There this court stated (258 Minn. 101, 102 N. W. [2d] 829):

“* * * [I]n the absence of express statutory authorization a bank has no right to establish branch banks. * * * Unlike other commercial or manufacturing corporations, banks are quasi-public in nature and the legislatures have in the public interest exercised a careful supervision over them.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Philadelphia National Bank
374 U.S. 321 (Supreme Court, 1963)
Farmers & Mechanics Savings Bank of Minneapolis v. Dept. of Commerce
102 N.W.2d 827 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1960)
Minnesota Building & Loan Ass'n v. Closs
234 N.W. 872 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1931)
Springfield Institution for Savings v. Worcester Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
107 N.E.2d 315 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1952)
Bruner v. Cit. Bank
120 S.W. 345 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1909)
Zenith Building & Loan Ass'n v. Heimbach
79 N.W. 609 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 N.W.2d 505, 270 Minn. 208, 1965 Minn. LEXIS 783, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/austin-s-l-assn-v-first-nat-bank-of-stewartville-minn-1965.