CORPORATIONS - SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT - UNLISTED TRADING PRIVILEGES

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended in 1936, the Securities and Exchange Commission is empowered to extend unlisted trading privileges to any security upon application by an exchange and the fulfillment of the terms and conditions of the statute

BANKS AND BANKING - TAXATION OF NATIONAL BANK - SAFE DEPOSIT VAULT AS INTEGRAL FUNCTION OF NATIONAL BANK

The council of the city of Portland passed an ordinance declaring it unlawful to carry on certain businesses without securing an appropriate license from the city. Among the business activities specified was Safe Deposit Vault for which an annual license fee of forty dollars was imposed. The plaintiff, a national bank, and other national banks, all of which operated safe deposit vaults, brought an action to restrain the city and its officers from collecting the fee. It was held that the safe deposit business is a necessary and integral function of a national bank, and therefore the city was without power to collect such a tax. Bank of California v. City of Portland, (Ore. 1937) 69 P. (2d) 273

Centennial Observance

Preparations for the appropriate observance of the University of Michigan Law School Centennial were started more than two years in advance of the 100th anniversary date. The arrangements were planned and are being carried out by two committees. One is an alumni centennial committee of forty-five members selected so as to be representative of law school alumni in all areas of the country. The other is a committee of members of the law faculty

PARENT AND CHILD - EFFECT OF ADOPTION ON LEGAL STATUS OF CHILD

In 1933 the appellants adopted the child of the appellees, and the decree declaring them to be the adoptive parents concluded with the words, With leave to parents to occasionally see the child. The natural parents, who were living apart, filed several petitions in the court to see the child at stated intervals. These petitions were granted. The adoptive parents, in 1936, filed a petition alleging that the repeated visits of the natural father and mother were prejudicially affecting the child\u27s nervous condition, and impairing his health, and praying that the provision under the decree be altered. Upon submission of testimony the chancellor refused to grant the petition modifying the decree, but ordered that the natural mother be given the right to have the child with her between stated hours one day each month. On appeal from this order, it was held that the original adoption decree should be altered as asked by the petitioner, for the exclusive right to custody of the child was in the adoptive parents. In describing the effect of the decree of adoption, the court stated, the adopted child is endowed with the status of a natural child of the adoptive parent. An infant who has been adopted, as in the case at bar, by a husband and wife, becomes the child of both adopting parents. . . . The adoptive parents were substituted for the infant\u27s natural parents with all their rights, duties, and obligations. Spencer v. Franks, (Md. 1937) 195 A. 306 (quotation at p. 310)

The Medical Malpractice Crisis

Based on a speech before the Committee of Visitors of the University of Michigan Law School, October 24, 1975, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Gair & Cutler: Negligence Cases: Winning Strategy

A Review of Negligence Cases: Winning Strategy. By Harry A. Gair and A. S. Cutler

Waltz & Inbau: Medical Jurisprudence

A Review of Medical Jurisprudence by Jon R. Waltz and Fred E. Inba

PARENT AND CHILD - EFFECT OF ADOPTION ON DUTY OF: PARENT TO SUPPORT CHILD

The defendant, father of the child whose support was in question, was-divorced by the plaintiff, mother of the child, in 1927. At that time, with the consent of both parties, the maternal grandparents adopted the child. In 1931 the grandfather died insolvent, and in 1933 the grandmother remarried and left the state. In 1934 the plaintiff adopted the child, and brought suit against the defendant for its support. The court entered an order requiring him to pay ten dollars per week for that purpose. After compliance for several months the defendant stopped payment, and in contempt proceedings protested the validity of the original order. He was adjudged guilty of contempt and committed to jail. On appeal it was held that the adoption of the child had not relieved the defendant of the duty to support it, and hence the lower court had properly ordered him to make the payments. Dwyer v. Dwyer, 366 Ill. 630, 10 N. E. (2d) 344 (1937)