Myers v. State Ex Rel. Depositors Savings & Loan Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Myers v. State Ex Rel. Depositors Savings & Loan Co.

196 N.E. 779, 130 Ohio St. 62, 130 Ohio St. (N.S.) 62, 3 Ohio Op. 108, 1935 Ohio LEXIS 265

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 26, 1935

Docket24992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 196 N.E. 779 (Myers v. State Ex Rel. Depositors Savings & Loan Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Myers v. State Ex Rel. Depositors Savings & Loan Co., 196 N.E. 779, 130 Ohio St. 62, 130 Ohio St. (N.S.) 62, 3 Ohio Op. 108, 1935 Ohio LEXIS 265 (Ohio 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The Depositors Savings & Loan Company of Cleveland, an association authorized and existing under the building and loan laws of Ohio, pursuant to proceedings to dissolve under Section 8623-79, General Code, presented a certificate of dissolution to the Secretary of State, who refused to file same, such refusal being based upon the ground that the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations of Ohio had refused to give his approval. Thereupon this ac *63 tion was brought in the Court of Appeals, on December 7, 1933, to obtain a writ of mandamus requiring the Secretary of State to file such certificate of dissolution, which was allowed.

For the purpose of protecting the rights and safeguarding the interests of all concerned, broad powers have been conferred by the Legislature upon the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations, including the authority of regulation, supervision and control of building and loan associations of this state. State, ex rel. Bettman, Atty. Genl., v. Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County, 124 Ohio St., 269, 178 N. E., 258. The decision of this court in State, ex rel. Doan Savings & Loan Co., v. Myers, Secy. of State, 128 Ohio St., 619, 193 N. E., 349, is rather decisive of the issue in this case. It was there held that Section 8623-2 must be considered in connection with Sections 9643-2 and 9643-3, General Code.

The various statutory provisions affecting such associations should be so construed and applied as to accomplish the manifest purpose of their enactment. That purpose would in a measure be thwarted if it be not required that a certificate of dissolution thereof shall have the approval of the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations.

It not appearing, therefore, that the relator at this time has a clear legal right to the writ of mandamus prayed for, it should not be issued.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Williams and Jones, JJ., not participating.

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

By the Court.

The Depositors Savings & Loan Company of Cleveland, an association authorized and existing under the building and loan laws of Ohio, pursuant to proceedings to dissolve under Section 8623-79, General Code, presented a certificate of dissolution to the Secretary of State, who refused to file same, such refusal being based upon the ground that the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations of Ohio had refused to give his approval. Thereupon this ac *63 tion was brought in the Court of Appeals, on December 7, 1933, to obtain a writ of mandamus requiring the Secretary of State to file such certificate of dissolution, which was allowed.

For the purpose of protecting the rights and safeguarding the interests of all concerned, broad powers have been conferred by the Legislature upon the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations, including the authority of regulation, supervision and control of building and loan associations of this state. State, ex rel. Bettman, Atty. Genl., v. Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County, 124 Ohio St., 269, 178 N. E., 258. The decision of this court in State, ex rel. Doan Savings & Loan Co., v. Myers, Secy. of State, 128 Ohio St., 619, 193 N. E., 349, is rather decisive of the issue in this case. It was there held that Section 8623-2 must be considered in connection with Sections 9643-2 and 9643-3, General Code.

The various statutory provisions affecting such associations should be so construed and applied as to accomplish the manifest purpose of their enactment. That purpose would in a measure be thwarted if it be not required that a certificate of dissolution thereof shall have the approval of the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations.

It not appearing, therefore, that the relator at this time has a clear legal right to the writ of mandamus prayed for, it should not be issued.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Williams and Jones, JJ., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 N.E. 779, 130 Ohio St. 62, 130 Ohio St. (N.S.) 62, 3 Ohio Op. 108, 1935 Ohio LEXIS 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/myers-v-state-ex-rel-depositors-savings-loan-co-ohio-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack