Source: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/324/200.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 17:25:00+00:00

Document:
Mr. P. C. Simons, of Enid, Okl., for petitioner.
Mr. Christy Russell, of Mattoon, Ill., for respondents.
We are called upon to determine the application in the circumstances of this case of Sec. 23 of the Act of Dec. 23, 1913,1 which imposes liability upon stockholders of a closed national bank.
November 25, 1929, the American National Bank of Enid, Oklahoma, pursuant to a resolution of its directors, [324 U.S. 200, 201] which recited that it contemplated 'disposing of its current business and thereafter going into voluntary liquidation,' sold its business and transferred its assets to the First National Bank of the same city in consideration of the payment of $350,000 and the assumption of its liabilities as disclosed by its books. The purchasing bank retained $110, 000 to guarantee the collection of negotiable paper taken over and to cover certain real estate temporarily retained by the seller. American closed its business and promptly distributed the $240,000 cash received ratably amongst its stockholders.
The judgment of the court below was right and must be affirmed.
[ Footnote 1 ] c. 6, 38 Stat. 251, 273, 12 U.S.C. 64, 12 U.S.C.A. 64.
[ Footnote 2 ] American National Bank of Enid v. Crews, 191 Okl. 53, 126 P.2d 733.
[ Footnote 3 ] Hoehn v. Crews, 10 Cir., 144 F.2d 665.
[ Footnote 4 ] 12 U.S.C. 181, 12 U.S.C.A. 181.
[ Footnote 5 ] 323 U.S. 701 , 65 S.Ct. 132.
[ Footnote 6 ] Supra, Note 1.
[ Footnote 7 ] Crescent City Nat. Bank v. Case, 99 U.S. 628 ; Bowden v. Johnson, 107 U.S. 251 , 2 S.Ct. 246; Whitney v. Butler, 118 U.S. 655 , 7 S.Ct. 61; Stuart v. Hayden, 169 U.S. 1 , 18 S. Ct. 274; Earle v. Carson, 188 U.S. 42 , 23 S.Ct. 254; McDonald v. Dewey, 202 U.S. 510 , 26 S.Ct. 731, 6 Ann. Cas. 419.
[ Footnote 8 ] Fletcher v. Porter, 1 Cir., 20 F.2d 23, and Collins v. Caldwell, 5 Cir., 29 F.2d 329, are in accord with the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals in the instant case.
[ Footnote 9 ] Compare Richmond v. Irons, 121 U.S. 27, 48 , 50 S., 7 S.Ct. 788, 797, 798.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.