William E. Nuesse, Commissioner of Banks, State of Wisconsin v. William Camp, Comptroller of the Currency

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that Rule 24(b)’s common claim or defense requirement “is not interpreted strictly so as to preclude permissive intervention”
• observing that “relegat[ion] to the status of amicus curiae . . . is not an adequate substitute for participation as a party”
• noting that “the ‘interest’ test is primarily a practical guide to disposing of lawsuits by involving as many apparently concerned persons as is compatible with efficiency and due process”
• finding state banking commissioner could intervene in suit to enjoin Comptroller of Currency from authorizing national bank to open branch in contravention of state law as incorporated into federal law under 12 U.S.C. § 36(c)
• opportunity to raise same issue in another forum is not bar to intervention as of right
• state banking commissioner had an interest in action in which the federal law incorporated the substance of the state law because the litigation involved \the nature and protection of the state policy\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).