From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mechanics Nat. Bank of Burl. Cty. v. Brady

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Jan 19, 1972
121 N.J. Super. 62 (App. Div. 1972)

Opinion

Argued January 10, 1972 —

Decided January 19, 1972.

Appeal from order of Commissioner of Banking.

Before Judges SULLIVAN, LEONARD and CARTON.

Mr. William F. Tompkins argued the cause for appellant ( Messrs. Lum, Biunno Tompkins, attorneys; Mr. William F. Dowd, on the Brief).

Mr. George F. Kugler, Jr., Attorney General, attorney for respondent James C. Brady, Jr., filed a Statement in Lieu of Brief ( Mr. T. Robert Zochowski, Deputy Attorney General, of Counsel).

Mr. Edward Suski, Jr., argued the cause for respondent Fidelity Bank and Trust Company ( Messrs. Wilinski, Coruzzi Suski, attorneys).


We affirm. Mechanics' contention that it had home office protection within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 17:9A-19 at the time the Commissioner approved Fidelity's branch office application is without merit. As of the date of this approval Mechanics had not yet passed the necessary shareholder's amendment to its Articles of Association and no formal certificate authorizing it to relocate its home office had been issued by the Comptroller of the Currency. As a fact these prerequisites were not accomplished until several months thereafter.

We find that Mechanics suffered no denial of due process, there being substantial compliance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-9 and with the rules adopted by the Department. Further, it was not prejudiced by the Hearer's denial of its request for an adjournment.

Finally, we conclude that there is substantial credible evidence in the record to support the Commissioner's factual findings and that there is a reasonable basis for his decision and order.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Mechanics Nat. Bank of Burl. Cty. v. Brady

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Jan 19, 1972
121 N.J. Super. 62 (App. Div. 1972)
Case details for

Mechanics Nat. Bank of Burl. Cty. v. Brady

Case Details

Full title:MECHANICS NATIONAL BANK OF BURLINGTON COUNTY, A NATIONAL BANKING…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Jan 19, 1972

Citations

121 N.J. Super. 62 (App. Div. 1972)
296 A.2d 78

Citing Cases

Mechanics Nat. Bank of Burlington Cty. v. Brady

PER CURIAM. The judgment of the Appellate Division, 121 N.J. Super. 62, is affirmed substantially for the…

In re Kallen

90 N.J. at 90. Seealso Kelly v. Sterr, 62 N.J. 105, cert. denied, 414 U.S. 822, 94 S.Ct. 122, 38 L.Ed.2d 55…