Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
National City Bank v. Philippine Islands, 1937 — 302 U.S. 651 · caselaw · US
General
National City Bank v. Philippine Islands
302 U.S. 651·Supreme Court of the United States·1937
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 35.
National City Bank v. Philippine Islands.
Argued November 16, 1937.
Decided November 22, 1937.
Mr. Carl A. Mead for petitioner. Mr. Raymond A. Walsh, with whom Messrs. Harry B. Hawes and Bon Geaslin were on the brief, for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Certiorari, 301 U. S. 677, to the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
Per Curiam:
The judgment of the Supreme Court of the Philippines is reversed and the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila, dated the 24th day of July 1934, is affirmed upon the authority of First National Bank v. California, 262 U. S. 366; Domenech v. National City Bank, 294 U. S. 199, 204, 205; and Posadas v. National City Bank, 296 U. S. 497, 499, 500.