In Conestoga National Bank of Lancaster v. Patterson, 442 Pa. 289, 275 A.2d 6 (1971), our Supreme Court held that procedural due process requires that protesting banks be given access to the information supporting the issue before the Department. Factually, Conestoga involved a bank's right to a hearing in a competitor bank's branch approval request. Former Section 904 of the Banking Code of 1965, formerly 7 P.S. 904, required a bank seeking to open a branch office to notify every banking institution within the same county of its application under certain circumstances. The Department denied Conestoga's hearing request to protest a competitor's application. The Supreme Court ultimately determined procedural due process required the Department to hold hearings on Conestoga's protest and to provide access to the Department's file and the competitor's supporting documentation. The Supreme Court observed that the prior version of the Non-Disclosure Provision of the Department of Banking Code required disclosure "under any other law of the Commonwealth," which included the constitutional right of appeal and the right to due process.