Wyoming Advisory Opinions January 25, 1988: AGO 1988-005 (January 25, 1988)

Wyoming Attorney General Opinions

1988.

AGO 1988-005.

FROM: Joseph B. Meyer Attorney General Peter J. Mulvaney Deputy Attorney General

QUESTION: Is the operation of more than one banking office in the same town by the same bank permissible in Wyoming?

ANSWER: No.

DISCUSSION

You have asked us to review a "position paper" concerning the operation of separate facilities in the same town by one bank.

We have one observation to record before stating our explanation of why branching is not permissible in Wyoming. Near the top of page 3, it is said:

It has become commonplace within the State of Wyoming, especially for larger banks, to conduct operations from more than one building and even from buildings at separate addresses, sometimes separated by intervening streets.

We do not necessarily question the accuracy of that statement, but it is a circumstance-of which we are unaware.

The position paper claims that branch banking is barred only if branches are opened in a city other than that in which the principal office is located. If this were true, it would be permissible for the First Interstate Bank of Gillette to operate from its original location and from the location of the bank closed by the comptroller of the currency. Some reliance is placed on W.S. 17-1-104 as authority for a bank to have more than one office. However

Title 17 of the statutes is not applicable to banks. See W.S. 17-1-103.

Contention is made that "the place" referred to in the statute concerning what shall be contained in a bank's articles of incorporation is the boundaries of the town or city for which the charter is eventually issued. This position overlooks two significant matters: First, W.S. 13 2-202 on articles of incorporation uses not only the term "place" but also "where its office" shall be located. Both terms are singular, contemplating one "office" at one "place." Secondly, W.S. 13-2-213 in specifying what the application for a certificate of authority shall contain, among other things, calls for "the address at which the institution shall operate." Again the singular is used.

The Attorney General's Opinion from 1930 which is referred to in the position paper at page 4 mentions a section of the 1920 statutes which the opinion author said might be construed to permit operating a bank at more than one location under the same charter. That section (5135) provided, in pertinent part, that persons could associate themselves together to carry on a banking business "in such place or places" and that the certificate of articles of association must state "the place or places where its offices shall be located." Note the use of the plural "places" and "offices." As the 1930 opinion writer points out, that statute was repealed in 1925. The act which repealed the previous banking act replaced it with a statute which deleted any plural form of "place" and "office" and used only the singular of both words. The singular has been adhered to ever since.

Further reinforcement is given to the premise that branch banking in any form is not permitted in Wyoming by reason of the fact that there was legislation introduced in 1975 (H.B. 356) and again in 1977 (H.B. 65) to authorize it. The joint corporations, elections and political subdivisions interim committee published a report on the subject in June 1975. It is logical to assume not only that the Legislature believes branch banking is not permitted, otherwise why would they have introduced authorizing legislation, but also that they don't want it. This is demonstrated by the death of the bill in committee of the house of origin in 1975, and in committee of the whole in the second house in 1977.

One more item is worthy of mention. According to 12 U.S.C. 36(c), national banks may branch in a given state if the state's law expressly permits state banks to do so. There are no branches of national banks in Wyoming.

All the foregoing considered it is our opinion that branch banking in any form is not permitted in Wyoming.