Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bank Leumi Trust Co. v. Schneider

Decided: December 17, 1981.

BANK LEUMI TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARGARET SCHNEIDER, DEFENDANT



Marzulli, J.s.c.

Marzulli

The issue addressed by this opinion is whether a foreign bank purchasing mortgages and receiving monthly payments thereon must comply with the Corporation Business Activities Reporting Act (hereinafter the Reporting Act), N.J.S.A. 14A:13-14 et seq.

Plaintiff is a bank, incorporated in the State of New York, and is not registered to do business in the State of New Jersey. Other than collecting mortgage payments from residents of New Jersey, plaintiff has no other business transactions in this State.

Plaintiff brought suit on a note and mortgage executed by defendant. The obligation was transferred by the original

mortgagee to a mortgage broker known as the Dartmouth Plan, who later sold and assigned the note and mortgage to plaintiff. Defendant defaulted.

Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with the provisions of the Reporting Act. Defendant contended that since plaintiff is not registered to do business in the State of New Jersey, it is not entitled to bring an action in the courts of New Jersey. Defendant's allegation is based on N.J.S.A. 14A:13-15, which states:

Every foreign corporation which during any calendar or fiscal accounting year ending after December 31, 1973, carried on any activity or owned or maintained any property in this State, unless specifically exempted under Section 3 of this Act [not applicable to plaintiff], shall be required to file a notice of business activities report.

Activities or property maintenance in this State which require corporations to file this report are:

(e.) receiving payments from persons residing in this State, or businesses located in this State, aggregating in excess of $25,000 regardless of any other connections with this State, or if the derivation of income from any source or sources within this State. . . .

Plaintiff admits it receives more than $25,000 a year from New Jersey residents, N.J.S.A. 14A:13-15(e), but, among other things, argues foreign banks are governed by the Banking Act of 1948, N.J.S.A. 17:9A-315 et seq.; therefore, the above provisions of the Reporting Act are not applicable.

The Banking Act requires any foreign bank wishing to transact business in this State to obtain from the Commissioner of Banking and Insurance a certificate of authority to transact such business and may transact business in this State only as an executor, testamentary trustee or guardian. N.J.S.A. 17:9A-316(B). However, the enforcement in this State of any obligations acquired by it in the transaction of business outside of this State is not prohibited. N.J.S.A. 17:9A-331(3).

If plaintiff is governed by the Banking Act, clearly it is exempt from the requirement of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.