OMAHA NATIONAL BANK
v.
NEBRASKANS FOR INDEPENDENT BANKING, INC., ET AL.
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.
Omaha National Bank sought approval to operate a drive-in/walk-in banking facility, but the Court of Appeals ruled that Nebraska state law prohibited the facility as an unauthorized branch under federal law. The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the decision after Nebraska amended its banking regulations to redefine permissible auxiliary teller facilities, allowing the lower court to reconsider the case in light of the new state law.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
From the time petitioner Omaha National Bank sought approval from the Regional Administrator of National Banks of its drive-in/walk-in facility until after the en banc decision of the Court of Appeals, Nebraska law permitted a state-chartered bank to operate one “attached auxiliary teller office” and not more than two “detached auxiliary teller offices.” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 8-157 (2) (1974). The two types of “auxiliary teller offices” were defined in Nebraska Department of Banking Reg. § 8-157-01 (1970). The Court of Appeals found it “abundantly clear” that a state bank situated like Omaha National would not be permitted to operate the added facility, and ruled that under 12 U. S. C. § 36, see First Nat. Bank v. Dickinson, 396 U. S. 122, 135 (1969), the facility was a branch which the bank was not permitted to operate. 530 F. 2d 755, 762 (CA8 1976).
Since the en banc decision, § 8-157 (2) has been amended by Legislative Bill 763, approved by the Governor on March 11, 1976, to redefine “auxiliary teller” facilities which state banks may operate. It appearing that this amendment, which will become effective in July 1976, may have a substantial bearing on the outcome of this case, the petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of Legislative Bill 763.
So ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
United States v. Avalos, 541 F.2d 1100 (5th Cir. 1976)…d that the exclusion of resident aliens from the grand jury and trial venires denied them equal protection of the laws. The Supreme Court has recently rejected this contention. In Perkins v. Smith, 370 F.Supp. 134 (D.Md. 1974), aff’d mem., - U.S. -, 96 S.Ct. 2616, 49 L.Ed.2d 368 (1976), the Court affirmed the proposition that federal and state laws excluding resident aliens from grand and petit jury service do not violate due process or equal protection. IV. Conclusion In sum, the prosecutors’ zeal for a c…
-
United States v. Esle, 743 F.2d 1465 (11th Cir. 1984)…ecognition of such a right would pose insuperable problems. Eligibility requirements for those who actually sit on the grand jury are clearly constitutional. See Perkins v. Smith, 370 F.Supp. 134 (D.Md.1974) (three judge court), aff'd, 426 U.S. 913, 96 S.Ct. 2616, 49 L.Ed.2d 368 (1976) (rule declaring aliens ineligible to serve on jury upheld). Therefore, if criminal suspects were entitled to grand juries reflecting the entire community, the qualified [*1481] jury list would need to be weighted to reflect t…
-
Nebraskans FOR Indep. Banking, Inc. v. The Omaha Nat'l Bank, 530 F.2d 755 (8th Cir. 1976)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- First Nat'l Bank in Plant City v. Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122 (U.S. 1969)
- Nebraskans FOR Indep. Banking, Inc. v. The Omaha Nat'l Bank, 530 F.2d 755 (8th Cir. 1976)