Woodring v. Wardell, 309 U.S. 527 (1940)

U.S. Supreme Court

Woodring v. Wardell

No. 5

Argued October 10, 11, 1939

Decided March 25, 1940

309 U.S. 527

Syllabus

Decided upon the authority of the case last preceding. 69 App.D.C. 280; 100 F.2d 690, reversed.

Certiorari, 306 U.S. 626, to review the affirmance of a judgment recovered by the receiver of a national bank against the petitioners.

Page 309 U. S. 529

U.S. Supreme Court

Woodring v. Wardell

No. 5

Argued October 10, 11, 1939

Decided March 25, 1940

309 U.S. 527

CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Syllabus

Decided upon the authority of the case last preceding. 69 App.D.C. 280; 100 F.2d 690, reversed.

Certiorari, 306 U.S. 626, to review the affirmance of a judgment recovered by the receiver of a national bank against the petitioners.

Page 309 U. S. 529

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a companion case to Inland Waterways Corp. v. Young, ante, p. 309 U. S. 517. The District National Bank pledged some of its assets to secure deposits made by the Secretary of War on behalf of the Panama Canal Zone. The Bank became insolvent in 1933, and the pledged assets were sold. Respondent, the Bank's receiver, brought this action to recover that part of the proceeds which represented an amount in excess of dividends paid to the ordinary depositors. The District Court held that the pledges were ultra vires, and gave judgment for the respondent. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 69 App.D.C. 280, 100 F.2d 690.

For the reasons stated in Inland Waterways Corp. v. Young, supra, we are of opinion that the pledges given by the Bank were valid, and that the judgment below should be reversed.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS, and MR. JUSTICE ROBERTS, for the reasons set forth in their dissenting opinion in Inland Waterways Corp. v. Young, ante, p. 309 U. S. 517, dissent here.

MR. JUSTICE REED and MR. JUSTICE MURPHY took no part in the disposition of this case.