Wells, Fargo & Co. v. Coleman
Before: Wallace
Synopsis
Injunction—Insufficient Allegations.—Where the complaint in an action • by a banking corporation to restrain the Bank Commissioners from taking any proceedings against the bank on account óf its refusal to permit the Commissioners to examine the affairs of the bank, alleged that the Commissioners “ threaten to commence (livers actions and proceedings in the Courts and elsewhere against the plaintiff on account of said refusal”: held, that the allegations would not support an injunction.
Commercial Banks subject to Examination. — Under the Act of March 30th, 1878, “ creating a Board of Bank Commissioners, and prescribing their duties and powers,” incorporated commercial banks are subject to examination by the Bank Commissioners.
By the Court, Wallace, C. J.: Irrespective of the question made in argument, as to the construction of the act, we think that the allegations of this bill would not support an injunction, and of course we could not reverse the order of the Court below refusing the injunction.
Inasmuch, however, as counsel on both sides have united in the request that we give expression to our views on the true construction of the act itself, I will add that we are all of opinion that incorporated commercial banks are plainly within the intent of the act, and subject to examination under its provisions.
Let the order be affirmed.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)