Does a bank have a right to search and seize client's personal information?

If the federal cases were to be interpreted more broadly than their facts justify, we would find their rationale unconvincing. In Katz v. United States, supra, 389 U.S. 347, 353, 88 S.Ct. 507, 512, 19 L.Ed.2d 576, it was said that the 'premise that property interests control the right of the Government to search and seize has been discredited.' The mere fact that the bank purports to own the records which it provided to the detective is not, in our view, determinative of the issue at stake. The disclosure by the depositor to the bank is made for the limited purpose of facilitating the conduct of his financial affairs; it seems evident that his expectation of privacy is not diminished by the bank's retention of a record of such disclosures.