McClellan v. Chipman
Citations
- 164 U.S. 347
- 17 S. Ct. 85
- 41 L. Ed. 461
- 1896 U.S. LEXIS 1869
Syllabus
<p>The provisions of §§ 96 and 98 of c. 157 of the Public Statutes of Massachusetts, invalidating preferences made by insolvent debtors and assignments or transfers made in contemplation of insolvency, do not conflict with the provisions containéd in Rev. Stat. §§ 5136 and 5137, relating to national banks and to mortgages of real estate made to them in good faith by way of security for debts previously contracted, and are valid when applied to claims of such banks against insolvent debtors.</p> <p>National Bank 'v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353, affirmed to the point that it is only when a state law incapacitates a national bank from discharging its duties to the government that it becomes unconstitutional: and Davis v. Elmira Savings Bank, 161 U. S. 275, affirmed to the point that national banks are instrumentalities of the Federal government, created for a public purpose, and as such necessarily subject to the paramount authority of the United States: and the two distinct propositions held to be harmonious.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that generally applicable state contract law did not “in any way impair[] the efficiency of national banks or frustrate[] the purpose for which they were created”
- holding law governing real estate transfers not preempted
- “impair their efficiency to discharge the duties imposed upon them by the law of the United States”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: White, After Stating the Case
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.