Title: WYOMING TRUST AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY A Corporation and Trust Company duly licensed and chartered to do business under the laws of Wyoming v. DWIGHT D. BONHAM, State Examiner and Ex-Officio member of Wyoming Financial Institutions Board; Et al.

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

WYOMING TRUST AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY A Corporation and Trust Company duly licensed and chartered to do business under the laws of Wyoming v. DWIGHT D. BONHAM, State Examiner and Ex-Officio member of Wyoming Financial Institutions Board; Et al.1985 WY 12694 P.2d 106Case Number: 84-73Decided: 01/24/1985Supreme Court of Wyoming

WYOMING TRUST AND MANAGEMENT 
COMPANY A CORPORATION AND TRUST COMPANY DULY LICENSED AND CHARTERED TO DO 
BUSINESS UNDER THE LAWS OF WYOMING, APPELLANT (PETITIONER), 

v. 

DWIGHT D. BONHAM, STATE 
EXAMINER AND EX-OFFICIO MEMBER OF WYOMING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS BOARD; ET AL., 
APPELLEES (RESPONDENTS).

 
 
Appeal from the District 
Court, LaramieCounty, Joseph F. Maier, 
J.

 
 
Rodger McDaniel, 
Southeast Wyoming Law Offices of McDaniel & Salazar, Cheyenne, for appellant.

A.G. McClintock, 
Atty. Gen., Peter J. Mulvaney, Deputy Atty. Gen., John W. Renneisen, Sr. Asst. 
Atty. Gen., and Patrick R. Day, Legal Intern, Cheyenne, for appellees.

Before THOMAS, C.J., and 
ROSE, ROONEY, BROWN and CARDINE, JJ.

BROWN, 
Justice.

[¶1.]     This appeal involves 
the question of whether trust companies have the authority to open a branch 
office in Wyoming. Appellant Wyoming Trust and 
Management Company sought a declaratory judgment in the First Judicial District 
to interpret the Trust Company Act (§ 13-5-101 et seq., W.S. 1977, of the 
Banking Act). Appellant sought declaratory relief after being denied permission 
to open a branch office by appelleeState Examiner Dwight Bonham. This 
decision was affirmed by the district court.

[¶2.]     We will 
affirm.

Appellant raises 
the following issues on appeal:

"Issue No. 1: Do the 
provisions of W.S. 13-5-101(a) and W.S. 13-5-110 (1977), which statutes grant 
certain powers and rights to trust companies, include the authority to open a 
branch office?

"Issue No. 2: Do the 
provisions of W.S. 13-5-104 (1977) or any other provision of the Trust Company 
Act, i.e. 13-5-101, et seq., require that a trust company conduct its business 
in only one community or otherwise preclude a trust company from opening a 
branch office elsewhere within the boundaries of the State of 
Wyoming?"

[¶3.]     State Examiner Bonham 
denied appellant's petition believing he had no statutory authority to permit a 
trust company to branch. The trial court found that the present Wyoming statutes do not 
permit a trust company to open a branch office. The court specifically found 
that if a trust company were allowed to branch, then the locality impact 
analysis required before a financial institution can be opened under §§ 13-2-211 
and 13-2-212, W.S. 1977, would be circumvented:

"Examining all of these 
statutes [§§ 13-5-104, 13-2-211, 13-2-212, W.S. 1977] in pari materia, as we 
must do, it seems very evident that if plaintiffs were entitled, as they claim, 
to open branch offices in any other city or town in the state, having once been 
chartered for a particular community, and as a matter of right are entitled to 
do so without complying with the provisions set forth above relating to the 
ascertainment of public need and convenience in the community where the proposed 
branch might be established, the legislative intent for protection of the public 
good would have been entirely avoided. It seems abundantly clear that the 
legislative intent is to require a separate charter for a financial institution 
in each community in which it may desire to operate, and compliance with all of 
the foregoing statutory provisions which require findings of community interest 
for the particular community where the financial institution is to be 
established.

"In the instant case, the 
plaintiff was chartered to provide a trust company service in the community of 
Gillette, in Campbell 
County, Wyoming. 
Plaintiff now seeks to open a branch office, without complying with the 
application procedures and chartering procedures a second time, in the city of 
Casper in NatronaCounty, and perhaps in other communities 
in the state. The legislature has said that before granting a charter, the bank 
examiner must first make an investigation and examination of `the need in the 
community,' `the adequacy of existing financial facilities,' and the effect that 
the proposed institution would have upon existing financial institutions in the 
community; and the ability of the community to support the proposed institution, 
including existing competition, the economic history of the community,' etc. 
Plaintiff would say that the state examiner has no right to make such an 
examination and investigation and approve or disapprove the granting of a 
charter in Casper, Wyoming, to this plaintiff, since this plaintiff has 
already had a charter granted to it to operate as a trust company in Gillette, Wyoming."

I

[¶4.]     It is generally held 
that there is no right for a bank to open branch banks in the absence of express 
statutory authorization. 10 Am.Jur.2d, Banks, § 324, p. 287 (1963). Such is an 
example of the so-phrased "silent prohibition" rule which articulates that since 
financial institutions are so closely regulated, they may not exercise any 
powers which are not expressly authorized by statute. Farmers and Mechanics Savings Bank of 
Minneapolis v. Department of Commerce, Security 
Division, 258 Minn. 99, 102 N.W.2d 827 (1960). See also 10 
Am.Jur.2d, Banks, § 270, pp. 240-241 (1963).

[¶5.]     Appellant concedes 
there is no direct express statutory authorization for a trust company to 
branch, but argues that certain provisions of the Trust Company Act authorize 
such branching by reference to other provisions. Specifically, appellant 
contends the general corporate powers granted trust companies under § 
13-5-101(a), W.S. 1977, and the reference made in § 13-5-110(a), W.S. 1977, make 
trust companies subject to laws governing savings and loan associations which 
allow branch offices. However, a careful analysis of the legislative history of 
Wyoming 
branching laws indicates that such is not the case.

[¶6.]     Chapter 5 of Title 13 
governing trust companies has its legislative origins in Chapter 157 of the 1925 
Wyoming Session Laws. This was the earliest law regulating financial 
institutions. The language used in that act required that the certificate of 
articles of incorporation specifically state: "The place where [the financial 
institution's] office shall be located * * *." (Emphasis added.) This language 
was interpreted by District Judge John F. Raper in the case of Jackson State 
Bank v. Bonham, No. 73-545, LaramieCounty (1974), as prohibiting branch 
banking. In that case the court construed the statute to prohibit branch 
banking. The same statute regulates banks and trust 
companies.

[¶7.]     It is important to note 
that the Wyoming Attorney General follows this interpretation evidenced by 
several opinions holding that banks have no authority to 
branch:

"* * * [A] corporation 
organized to conduct a banking business in the State of Wyoming cannot operate at 
more than one location nor organize more than one bank under the same charter." 
Op.Wyo. Att'y Gen., pp. 165-166 (1930).

[¶8.]     The above position was 
followed in subsequent opinions: 6 Op.Wyo.Att'y Gen. 159-160 (1963); and 31 
Op.Wyo.Att'y Gen. 89 (1965). The State Examiner's office has also been in accord 
with the above interpretation and the legislature has not seen fit to change it, 
expressly voting down any attempt to legislate branch 
banking.

"Administrative 
interpretation of a state and opinions of the Attorney General are entitled to 
weight when the legislature has failed over a long period of time to make any 
change in the statute. Such failure is some indication of an acquiescence by the 
legislature to administrative interpretation and to the opinion of the Attorney 
General. [Citation.] * * *" Public Service Commission v. Formal Complaint of WWZ 
Company, Wyo., 
641 P.2d 183 (1982).

[¶9.]     The present act 
regulating trust companies (§ 13-5-101 et seq., W.S. 1977) retains the single 
"place" of business language, § 13-5-102(b) referring to the articles of 
incorporation requirements in § 13-2-202. The legislature did not change the 
language and it appears the intent is to keep the effect of such single place of 
business limitation the same.

[¶10.]  In contrast is the legislative history of 
the Savings and Loan Associations Act (§ 13-6-101, et seq., W.S. 1977). That act 
was not taken from the 1925 Banking Act, but from an act passed in 1927 which 
created a new form of financial institution called "building and loan 
associations." The purpose of the act:

"Any association which 
shall be organized within this State for the purpose of accumulating funds from 
its members, share holders, or savings certificate holders, to be loaned to its 
members, or others, and any association, company, corporation, or syndicate that 
sells savings certificates payable by installment, shall, for the purposes of 
this Act, be known and considered as domestic building and loan associations; provided, that this Act shall not apply to 
associations, or corporations legally engaged in the business of banking within 
this State." (Emphasis added.) Section 1, Ch. 103, S.L. of Wyoming, 1927.

The act 
expressly did not apply to financial institutions engaged in the business of 
banking under the 1925 Banking Act. It is important to distinguish which 
institutions the 1925 act applied to: banks, savings associations, trust 
companies, and loan and trust companies. Therefore, the "savings associations" 
created under the 1925 Banking Act were not the same institutions created under 
the 1927 act known as "building and loan associations." The former were 
regulated the same as banks, while the latter were governed by separate 
regulations not relating to banks.

[¶11.]  Another important distinction between the 
1925 and 1927 acts was that unlike the single place of business limitation in the 1925 
act, the 1927 act provided for a "principal place of business." Section 
2(b), Ch. 103, S.L. of 
Wyoming, 1927. 
This language does not appear to be as limiting as that found in the 1925 
act.

[¶12.]  In 1959, the Wyoming legislature 
passed the Guaranty Capital Savings and Loan Association Act. This act 
specifically placed Wyoming building and loan associations on 
equal ground with federally chartered savings and loan associations and subject 
to the same federal regulations. Federal regulations allowed savings and loan 
associations the power to branch and, therefore, Wyoming building and loan associations could 
now do the same with the state examiner's approval.

[¶13.]  In 1977, the Wyoming legislature 
passed a comprehensive act consolidating all previous acts regarding financial 
institution regulation. The preamble of the act reads in part: "AN ACT to create 
W.S. 13-1-101 through 13-10-111; * * * relating to banks and other financial 
institutions; * * * eliminating duplications, redundancies and archaic 
provisions in Title 13 * * *." Ch. 67, S.L. of Wyoming, 1977. That act, which is the present 
form of Title 13, eliminated specific provisions for "savings associations," 
"trust banks" and "loan companies." Instead, Title 13 now applies to "banks" and 
"financial institutions" which includes banks, guaranty capital savings and loan 
associations, building and loan associations, trust companies, and state 
chartered credit unions. §§ 13-1-101(a)(iv) and 13-2-203, W.S. 1977. The 
legislature deleted "savings associations" and "loan companies" from the 
statutory scheme, and probably should have deleted the reference in § 
13-5-110(a), W.S. 1977, to "savings associations and loan companies." This 
legislative oversight cannot be used to support appellant's contention that 
trust companies are to be regulated as "other financial institutions" such as 
guaranty capital savings and loan associations which historically were regulated 
under the 1927 act rather than being subject to regulation as a bank subject to 
the 1925 banking act and the express language of the statute alluding to "the" 
place of its office.

In summary, 
trust companies and savings and loan associations are organized under different 
statutes. Trust companies and banks are organized under § 13-2-202, W.S. 1977, 
and must include the "place where its 
office shall be located and its operations conducted," in its articles of 
incorporation. Conversely, savings and loan associations are organized under § 
13-6-102, W.S. 1977, and must state where the "principal place of business of the 
association is to be located," in its articles of incorporation. The phrase, 
"principal place of business" is a much broader term than "place where * * * its 
operations conducted," and suggests more than one place of business is 
permitted.

[¶14.]  We do not believe it is proper to allow a 
trust company the power to open a branch office under the authority of the 
savings and loan association provisions. To do so is to ignore the legislative 
history which created two separate and distinct financial institutions. There is 
no statutory authority which gives trust companies the power to branch nor do we 
think the legislature intended such power be given. "All statutes are presumed 
to be enacted with the full knowledge of the existing state of law with 
reference thereto." Brittain v. 
Booth, Wyo., 601 P.2d 532, 534 (1979). We will not 
add words to a statute. Matter of 
Adoption of Voss, Wyo., 
550 P.2d 481 (1976).

II

[¶15.]  As stated previously, the trial court 
ruled that if trust companies were permitted to branch, it would circumvent the 
locality impact analysis required by §§ 13-2-211 and 13-2-212, W.S. 1977. 
Appellant claims this is unimportant since the same provisions govern savings 
and loan associations which do have the power to branch.

[¶16.]  Section 13-7-102(a), W.S. 1977, 
specifically states that guaranty capital savings and loan associations in 
Wyoming are 
subject to federal statutes, rules and regulations governing the same. Section 
1464(e) of the Home Owners' Loan Act of 1933 provides for a locality impact 
analysis similar to Wyoming's that must be performed before each 
branch of a savings and loan association is opened. 12 U.S.C. § 1464(e) (1976). 
Since a locality impact analysis must be performed under federal law, 
appellant's argument that savings and loan associations need no such analysis 
before opening a branch must fail. The trial court was correct when he held that 
allowing trust companies to branch would circumvent the locality impact analysis 
requirement of §§ 13-2-211 and 13-2-212, W.S. 1977.

[¶17.]  Having found no reversible error in the 
trial court's holding, the judgment is affirmed.