abandonment period, American Express’ decision to offer traveler’s checks free of charge would not stand. [Record No. 13, Attach. 2] Since American Express enjoys a property interest in these funds until the presumptive abandonment period begins, it is the length of this period that goes to the heart of American Express’ due process claim. This issue brings the Court to the second prong of the due process analysis: whether shortening the presumed abandonment period violates notions of due process. It is long-settled that a state, through the exercise of its inherent police power, may take custody of abandoned or unclaimed property in the interests of the unknown or at-large owner. See Provident Inst. for Sav. In Town of Boston v. Malone, 221 U.S. 660, 31 S.Ct. 661, 55 L.Ed. 899 (1911) (<HOLDING>). The Plaintiff does not take issue with the
holding that georgia courts may exercise their inherent power to dismiss cases brought by nonresident aliens holding that states may exercise their supervisory power to take custody of bank savings deposits holding that a waiter at a local restaurant was not engaged in commerce even though he made bank deposits for defendants holding that a commission is a body with special and limited power and it can only exercise the power expressly or impliedly granted to it and any reasonable doubt of existence of any power must be resolved against the exercise thereof recognizing the supervisory power of appellate courts