Franklin National Bank of Franklin Square v. New York (347 U.S. 373)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 5, 1954 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 347 U.S. 373 · 74 S. Ct. 550
- Docket
- No. 427
- Argued
- March 9, 1954
- Decided
- April 5, 1954
- Term
- October Term 1953
- Vote
- 8–1
- Majority author
- Justice Jackson (R.H.)
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Warren, Justice Black, Justice Douglas, Justice Clark, Justice Frankfurter, Justice Burton, Justice Minton, Justice R. H. Jackson (wrote)
- Dissenting
- Justice Reed (wrote)
Opinion excerpt
Opinion of the Court by Mr. Justice Jackson, announced by Mr. Justice Frankfurter. This appeal from the Court of Appeals of New York presents the narrow question whether federal statutes which authorize national banks to receive savings deposits conflict with New York legislation which prohibits them from using the word “saving” or “savings” in their advertising or business. We think the federal and state statutes are incompatible, and in such circumstances the policy of the State must yield. It is the policy of New York to charter and foster the mutual savings bank, a nonprofit institution whose earnings inure to the benefit of depositors rather than to stockholders. These institutions have a long history as relatively stable and safe depositaries for the accumulations of thrifty New Yorkers and as a source of credit for limited uses. They have grown to be an important part of New York’s banking and economic structure. That State also charters the savings and loan association, an institution of a different type, intended to serve somewhat similar ends. The Legislature was concerned lest commercial banks, in seeking to induce deposits of the same character, so use the word “savings” as to lead uninformed and indiscriminating persons to believe that they were dealing with the chartered savings institutions. Hence, by its Banking Law, New York has forbidden use of the word…
Excerpt of a 12,186-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.