12 U.S.C. § 377

Repealed. Pub. L. 106–102, title I, § 101(a), Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1341

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1934–2002 · leading case: Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 468 U.S. 137 (1984).
Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 468 U.S. 137 (1984). · cites it 2× “207, we rely on the " `familiar principle of statutory construction that words grouped in a list should be given related meaning,' " to support our conclusion that the Board reasonably construed the term "public sale" in § 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, 12 U. S. C. § 377 , "to…”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. Camp, 401 U.S. 617 (1971). · cites it 2× “[12] Section 20 of the Act, 12 U. S. C. § 377 , prohibits affiliations between banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System and organizations "engaged principally in the issue, flotation, underwriting, public sale, or distribution at wholesale or retail or through…”
Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 468 U.S. 207 (1984). · cites it 2× “Second, it argues that §20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, 12 U. S. C. § 377 , prohibits a bank holding company from owning any entity that is engaged principally in retail securities brokerage and thus that the Board lacked statutory authority under § 4(c)(8) to approve BAC’s…”
Indep. Cmty. Bankers of Am. v. Bd. of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys., 195 F.3d 28 (D.C. Cir. 1999). · cites it 3× “And it found the acquisition in compliance with § 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, 12 U.S.C. § 377 (1994), as none of Citigroup’s affiliates would derive more than 25% of its gross revenues from bank ineligible securities.”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. Camp, 274 F. Supp. 624 (D.D.C. 1967). · cites it 4× “” Section 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, now 12 U.S.C. § 377 , provides: “After one year from June 16, 1933, no member bank shall be affiliated in any manner described in subsection (b) of section 221a of this title with any corporation, association, business trust, or other…”
Bd. of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys. v. Inv. Co. Inst., 450 U.S. 46 (1981). “188 , 12 U. S. C. § 377 . Although “affiliate” as originally defined in § 2 (b) of the Glass-Steagall Act did not include holding companies, see 48 Stat.”
Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Comptroller of the Currency, 577 F. Supp. 252 (D.D.C. 1983). · cites it 2× “*256 The court’s understanding of the scope of the prohibitions of Glass-Steagall is reinforced by analysis of Section 20 of the statute, 12 U.S.C. § 377 , which provides that a bank may not be affiliated with any organization which is “engaged principally in the issue,…”
Morgan Stanley & Co. v. Sec. Exch. Comm'n, 126 F.2d 325 (2d Cir. 1942). · cites it 2× “684 , 707, 12 U.S.C.A. § 377 , it was necessary for one activity to be dropped.”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 606 F.2d 1004 (D.C. Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “188 , codified as amended, 12 U.S.C. § 377 . 20 *1013 Interlocking managements between national or state member banks and securities firms were forbidden by section 32 of the Act, 48 Stat.”
Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., & Bankamerica Corp., Intervenor, 716 F.2d 92 (2d Cir. 1984). “That provision, § 20, 12 U.S.C. § 377 (1976) states: *96 (N)o member bank shall be affiliated in any manner .”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. C.T. Conover, Comptroller of the Currency, 790 F.2d 925 (D.C. Cir. 1986). “of issuing, underwriting, selling or distributing, at wholesale or retail, or through syndicate participation, stocks, bonds, debentures, notes, or other securities, to engage at the same time to any extent whatever in the business of receiving deposits subject to check or to…”
In Re Lutheran Bhd. Variable Ins. Prods. Co. Sales Practices Litig., 105 F. Supp. 2d 1037 (D. Minnesota 2000). “Since the 1930’s, the Glass-Steagall Act, 12 U.S.C. § 377 et seq., prevented organizations which engage in banking services from also engaging in the issuing, underwriting, sale, or distribution of securities.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.