12 U.S.C. § 378
Dealers in securities engaging in banking business; individuals or associations engaging in banking business; examinations and reports; penalties
1978—Subsec. (a)(2)(B). Pub. L. 95–369 inserted reference to permission by the United States to engage in such business and subjection by the laws of the United States to examination and regulation.
1968—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 90–448 inserted “, or issuing securities” in first proviso.
1959—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 86–230 inserted “and subjected, by the laws of the United States, or of the State, Territory, or District wherein located, to examination and regulation,” after “District,” in cl. (2)(A).
1935—Subsec. (a). Act
For effective date of amendment by Pub. L. 90–448, see section 808 of Pub. L. 90–448, set out as a note under section 1716b of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 47
cases, 1946–2019 · 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). “707 , 12 U. S. C. § 378 (a)(1) (exempting mortgage notes from the coverage of § 21).”
United States v. Andrew Jenkins, 943 F.2d 167 (2d Cir. 1991). “§ 1952 (a) (1988) (“Travel Act”), and 12 U.S.C. § 378 (1988) (“Glass-Steagall Act”).”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. Camp, 401 U.S. 617 (1971). “" And § 21 of the same Act, 12 U. S. C. § 378 (a), provides that "it shall be unlawful(1) For any person, firm, corporation, association, business trust, or other similar organization, engaged in the business of issuing, underwriting, selling, or distributing, at wholesale or…”
Nat'l Credit Union Admin. v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 522 U.S. 479 (1998). “189 , 12 U. S. C. § 378 (a). [6] The legislative history of § 109, upon which petitioners so heavily rely, supports this conclusion.”
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,494 Great W. Bank & Trust v. Sol Kotz, 532 F.2d 1252 (9th Cir. 1976). “§ 24 ] or § 21 [ 12 U.S.C. § 378 (a)] that suggests a narrow reading of the word ‘securities.”
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Trump, 953 F.3d 178 (2d Cir. 2019). ““ 12 U.S.C. § 378 (a). Discussing 9 the purpose of Glass‐Steagall, the Court concluded that “Congress [] had in 10 mind .”
Am. Bankers Ass'n v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 804 F.2d 739 (D.C. Cir. 1986). “hall not prohibit national banks or State banks or trust companies (whether or not members of the Federal Reserve System) or other financial institutions or private bankers from dealing in, underwriting, purchasing and selling investment securities, or issuing securities, to the…”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. Camp, 274 F. Supp. 624 (D.D.C. 1967). “12 U.S.C. § 378 , provides: “(a) After the expiration of one year after June 16, 1933, it shall be unlawful— “(1) For any person, firm, corporation, association, business trust, or other similar organization, engaged in the business of issuing, underwriting, selling, or…”
Inv. Co. Inst. v. C.T. Conover, Comptroller of the Currency, 790 F.2d 925 (D.C. Cir. 1986). “Section 16 of the Act forbids national banks to underwrite or deal in “securities or stock.” 12 U.”
Bernstein v. Jones (In re I.D. Craig Serv. Corp.), 125 B.R. 453 (W.D. Pa. 1991). “12 U.S.C. § 378 (a)(2) (footnotes omitted).”
Bd. of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys. v. Inv. Co. Inst., 450 U.S. 46 (1981). “189 , 12 U. S. C. § 378 . 16 A memorandum submitted to the Board on behalf of the American Bankers Association states, in part: “For well over a century, banks and trust companies in every state have managed and administered customers’ investment funds in the form of trusts,…”
United States v. Andrew Jenkins, 876 F.2d 1085 (2d Cir. 1989). “Count II charged that Jenkins violated 12 U.S.C. § 378 when he engaged in the business of receiving bank deposits without proper authorization.”
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.