¶1National Bank in Charge of Examiner — Lf.vy of Executions.
¶2The fact tbat a national bank, for whicli no receiver has yet been appointed, is in charge of an examiner appointed by the comptroller to investigate its affairs, does not exempt its tangible assets from levy under execution upon final judgment.
¶3This was a suit in equity by William H. Kimball, as examiner in charge of a national bank, against Thomas J. Dunn and others, to enjoin the levying of an execution on the property of the bank. The cause was heard on a motion for a preliminary injunction.
¶4Herman Aaron, for the motion.
¶5George Coggill, opposed.
¶7The statutes provide for the appointment of a receiver of a national bank. Rev. St. U. S. § 5234. But it appears that in the cause at bar no receiver has yet been appointed. I am unable to assent to the proposition that because the comptroller of the currency, in conformity to the provision of section 5240, has appointed plaintiff as a suitable person to make an examination of the affairs of the bank, plaintiff thereby'’ became a temporary receiver. Until the comptroller decides to put the bank into the hands of a receiver, under section 5234, there is nothing in the statutes to support the contention that its tangible assets are exempt from levy under execution upon final judgment. Section 5242, by its terms, applies apparently only to “attachment, injunction, and execution … before final judgment.” Motion denied.