CITIZENS BANK OF HATTIESBURG, M. D. BRETT AND J. W. MANGUM, APPELLANTS,
v.
WILLIAM B. CAMP, COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1967-12-04
No. 24568
387 F.2d 375 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1967) Positive Treatment
Cited by 18 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

Assuming standing, the court held that the Comptroller's approval of a new national bank charter was lawful, as no formal adversary hearing is required and the decision is not subject to de novo review.


Facts & Procedural History

Two banks and stockholders challenged the Comptroller of the Currency's approval of a new national bank charter. The district court dismissed their co…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The Citizens Bank of Hattiesburg and two stockholders of the First National Bank of Hattiesburg seek a declaratory judgment that the approval by the Comptroller of the Currency of the application for the chartering of the Southern National Bank of Hattiesburg as a new national bank was unlawful. Pursuant to a full and able opinion, the district court dismissed the complaint.

We need not decide the question of whether a competing bank and stockholders of d second competing bank have standing to challenge the chartering of a new national bank for, assuming such standing arguendo, we agree with the district court that the complaint is without merit.

The present applicable statutes 1 and regulation 2 do not require the Comptroller to hold a formal adversary hearing in determining whether to approve the chartering of a new national bank.3 The action of the Comptroller is not subject to review by trial de novo.4 The court may not substitute its judgment for that of the Comptroller. Upon the present record we cannot hold that the Comptroller denied the appellants a full and fair opportunity to oppose the granting of the charter, that he acted arbitrarily or otherwise illegally. We find no substance in appellants’ other contentions. The judgment is

Affirmed.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel or Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en' banc, Rule 25 (a), subpar. (b), the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.

. 12 U.S.C.A. §§ 21, 22 and 26.

. 12 C.F.R. 4.2.

. Webster Groves Trust Co. v. Saxon, 8 Cir. 1966, 870 F. 2d 381; 1 Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 4.04.

. See authorities cited in note 3.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw