Virginia Bankers Ass'n v. Harrisonburg Loan & Thrift Corp.
Docket: Record 5383
Court: Supreme Court of Virginia; March 5, 1962; Virginia; State Supreme Court
Virginia Bankers Association appealed a decision by the State Corporation Commission allowing Harrisonburg Loan and Thrift Corporation to advertise its membership in the Virginia and American Industrial Bankers Associations without breaching Section 6-251 of the Code. This section, amended by the 1960 General Assembly, prohibits industrial loan associations from suggesting they are regulated by the State Corporation Commission or imply they engage in banking or accept deposits. The Commissioner of Banking had previously warned Harrisonburg about potential violations related to its advertisements, particularly concerning the term "withdrawals." While Harrisonburg complied with most requests, it contested the prohibition on advertising its memberships. A hearing was held where evidence included correspondence between Harrisonburg and the Commissioner, advertising materials, and testimonies from representatives of industrial loan associations. The majority of the Commission ultimately ruled that Harrisonburg's advertisements regarding its memberships and the term "withdrawals" did not violate Section 6-251, with Commissioner Catterall dissenting. Virginia Bankers Association did not contest the use of the term "withdrawals" but focused on whether the Commission erred in determining that Harrisonburg did not violate § 6-251 by promoting its membership in the Virginia Industrial Bankers Association and the American Industrial Bankers Association. Virginia Bankers Association argued that this advertising implied Harrisonburg operated as a bank, which required no additional evidence to substantiate. In contrast, Harrisonburg maintained that the matter was factual and within the Commission's purview to decide. The court agreed with Harrisonburg, stating that it is the Commission's role to determine if the advertisements misleadingly suggested banking operations. Virginia Bankers Association contended that the General Assembly's enactment of § 6-251 implicitly deemed such advertisements misleading and contrary to public interest. However, it remained a factual question for the Commission to decide. The Commission does not need public opinion evidence to interpret the advertisements' implications; it can rely on its expertise. An order from the Commission is presumed just, reasonable, and correct, as stipulated in Section 156(f) of the Virginia Constitution. The appellate court has jurisdiction to review the Commission's actions but respects the presumption of correctness unless there is evidence of abuse of discretion. The majority opinion noted that the term "Industrial" in the associations' names indicates their members operate in the industrial loan sector rather than general banking. The Commissioners found that Harrisonburg's advertising did not imply involvement in banking activities, and this presumption of correctness was not challenged. The court concluded that the Commission's findings were adequately supported and affirmed the order.