12 U.S.C. § 67
Individual liability of shareholders; compromises; authority of receiver
Any receiver of a national banking association is authorized, with the approval of the Comptroller of the Currency and upon the order of a court of record of competent jurisdiction, to compromise, either before or after judgment, the individual liability of any shareholder of such association.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1933–1949 · leading case: Oosterhuis v. Palmer
Oosterhuis v. Palmer (1943)
“The controlling statute is 12 U.S.C.A. § 67 , which provides: “Any receiver of a national banking association is authorized, with the approval of the Comptroller of the Currency and upon the order of a court of record of competent jurisdiction, to compromise, either before or…”
Therrell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1937)
“” His appointment, powers, and compensation are in complete analogy to those of a national bank receiver under 12 U.S.C.A. §§ 67 , 191, 192. Of such a receiver it was said in Re Chetwood, 165 U.”
General Discount Corp. v. Schram (1942)
“12 U.S.C.A. § 67 . 5. Where settlement of a controversy has been fairly reached and executed by parties dealing at arm’s length, and there is no fraud, misstatement, intentional concealment, overreaching or mutual mistake, the fact that one party did not comprehend the…”
Goess v. A. D. H. Holding Corp. (1936)
“12 U.S.C.A. § 67 . That such a compromise sets a limit upon -the liability of all other shareholders is a preposterous notion.”
Fidelity Trust Co. v. Colonial Trust Co. (1949)
“” 12 U.S.C.A. § 67 . The National Bank Act provides that the proceeds of assets of a defunct bank which are undistributed after all obligations have been met, shall be distributed: “First.”
McNeil, Rec'r v. Arrowsmith (1933)
“contention of the appellant, the present receiver of said bank, that said agreement was invalid and not binding on the receiver, for the reason that, under his contention, said compromise settlement was not approved by the Comptroller of the Currency, nor by the Court, and,…”
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.