Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank v. Bougas

PETITIONER: Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank
LOCATION: Virginia Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission

DOCKET NO.: 76-398
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981)
LOWER COURT: State appellate court

CITATION: 434 US 35 (1977)
ARGUED: Oct 03, 1977
DECIDED: Nov 08, 1977

Michael J. Kovacich - for respondent
William C. Humphreys, Jr. - for petitioner; Daniel B

Facts of the case


Media for Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank v. Bougas

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - October 03, 1977 in Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank v. Bougas

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - November 08, 1977 in Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank v. Bougas

Warren E. Burger:

The judgment and opinion of the Court in 76-398 Citizens and Southern National Bank against Bougas will be announced by Mr. Justice Blackmun.

Harry A. Blackmun:

This case comes to us from the Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia.

The issue is as to the proper venue in a state court of a transitory cause of action against a National Bank.

The resolution of the case depends on the construction of a Federal Statute formerly Section 94 of Title 12 of the United States Code.

This statute resides an action against a National Bank in Federal Court, may be had where the bank is established, but when it is the State Court it may be held where the bank is located.

The petitioners Citizens and Southern is a National Bank.

It's home office is in Savannah, Georgia, but it has branches in other places in the State of Georgia.

This action was brought against Decould County, I think they call it DeKalb county down there, near Atlanta.

The bank moved a dismissal suit on grounds of improper venue.

The county court denied that motion and the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed.

In an opinion filed with a clerk today, we hold that the venue for a suit against a National Bank brought in a State Court need not be in the county where the bank's charter was issued, in this case in Chatham county where Savannah is located, but may it be in a county in which the bank conducts its business at an authorized branch.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia is therefore affirmed.

Mr. Justice Stewart has joined the opinion but has filed a separate concurring statement.

Warren E. Burger:

Thank you, Mr. Justice Blackmun.